As previously discussed, the Bayview Cross in Pensacola, Florida, had been challenged on the same grounds as the Bladensburg Peace Cross, with accusations it was an unconstitutional endorsement of the Christian faith.

The original court ruled against the Bayview Cross — reluctantly, essentially asking the Supreme Court to overrule it. The Supreme Court remanded the Bayview Cross case after its Bladensburg ruling.

Now, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals has finally formally ruled the Bayview Cross can stand:

The court ruled Wednesday that the Bayview Cross in Pensacola, which was built ahead of World War II as a place for the community to gather, does not violate the Constitution…

The federal appeals court ruled the cross is constitutional, noting it has become “embedded in the fabric of the Pensacola community” and that removing it could “strike many as aggressively hostile to religion.”

This is the correct response. In the past, people tried to come up with “creative” ways to make the cross “legal” by, for example, selling the small square of ground on which it stood to a private group. Such legal gymnastics acceded too much to the critics, granting them a heckler’s veto over a simple cross or memorial.

While much credit goes to First Liberty for the Bladensburg ruling and Becket for the Bayview ruling, can there be any doubt of the impact of the current Presidential administration and its judicial nominees and guidelines?

The American Humanist Association called the move to protect religious liberty a “devastating blow”. In the last case, Michael “Mikey” Weinstein called it the first steps toward the reality of the Handmaid’s Tale.

Yes, Mikey, your feelings are hurt. Perhaps you can find reassurance in your own symbol of peace and comfort — rather than trying to tear down those of others.

ADVERTISEMENT