Quantcast
Home manage Las Vegas Review-Journal
  Jobs Cars Homes Shopping Travel Weddings Golf Best of Las Vegas Photo   Search:

RECENT EDITIONS
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun

sponsored by
News


U.S. Supreme Court taking interest in Mojave cross

WASHINGTON -- The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to step into a long-running legal fight over an 8-foot cross that stands as a war memorial in the Mojave National Preserve in California.

The justices said that in court arguments set for this fall, they will consider throwing out an appeals court ruling that ordered the cross removed.


Most Popular Stories
  • TRAFFIC STOP: Shooting accounts conflict
  • Traffic accident claims life of longtime, successful lawyer
  • Man shot by police identified as local attorney
  • NORM: At time, drug use wasn't suspected
  • One motorcyclist killed, another critically injured in accident
  • NORM: Marie Osmond, manager battling
  • Nurseries fence out day laborers
  • Second person dies after being restrained by police
  • Boy struck, killed by car pulling out of driveway
  • Three children fall from vehicle; mothers arrested




  • The American Civil Liberties Union and a former National Park Service employee have been challenging the cross's continued presence on national parkland for nearly eight years. A cross has stood on the site for decades atop Sunrise Rock, just off Cima Road south of Interstate 15.

    The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals twice said the cross must come down. It invalidated a 2004 congressionally approved land transfer to a private party, saying "carving out a tiny parcel of property in the midst of this vast preserve -- like a donut hole with the cross atop it -- will do nothing to minimize the impermissible governmental endorsement."

    The origin of the cross dates back to 1934 when J. Riley Bembry and other World War I veterans fashioned a cross out of steel pipe. According to a plaque they placed nearby, they intended it to be a memorial to all war veterans.

    The vets would gather at the rock on Easter Sunday for sunrise services. The cross became more than a war memorial; it became a religious gathering place.

    The plaque disappeared and vandals or the elements sometimes would knock the cross down. But Bembry or another vet would put it back up.

    Bembry died in 1984, and new caretakers took over.

    In October 1999, the ACLU threatened to sue if the cross was not removed. Park Service officials decided the cross did not have enough historical significance to qualify for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places.

    The Review-Journal contributed to this report. Wondering how a local story turned out or what happened to someone in the news? Call the City Desk at 383-0264, and we will try to answer your question in this column.

    Newsvine Digg Fark Technorati reddit StumbleUpon del.icio.us Slashdot Propeller Mixx Furl Twitter MySpace Facebook Google Bookmarks Yahoo! Bookmarks Windows Live Favorites Ask MyStuff myAOL Favorites

    Leave Your Comment 14 Reader Comments
    Terms & Conditions
    The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

    Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
    Current Word Count:

    Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.

    Report abuse

    Ereck (VET) wrote on July 11, 2009 04:17 PM: The cross in this instance is not and should not be considered for religious purposes. Sources indicate that the cross was chosen as a symbol of sacrifice (the sacrifice made by those who died in the interests of America). There's much more to this story.
    http://www.rapturealert.com/2005/060205sunriserock.html

    http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/news.aspx?id=3622&printer-friendly=y


    Report abuse

    Troy Fruge wrote on May 21, 2009 01:54 AM: This is truly a National disgrace!

    To see the cross, covered over as if it were a thing to be ashamed of. We are a people unworthy of the blessings of God, and the sacrifices those Veterans made on our behalf if we allow this attack on our sacred heritage to continue.

    If this be allowed: Where will it all stop? Will the Arlington National cemetery be next? And then the Washington monument? Just when will these religious bigots be happy?

    "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or PROHIBITING THE FREE EXERCISE THEREOF..."

    Isn't it funny how the anti-Christians utterly ignore the last part of the 1st Amendment? And since CONGRESS is prohibited from depriving our religious freedoms; they have turned our Court systems into renegade legislatures, where unelected Justices rule like demigods, since they have no Electorate to fear.

    As a Veteran, I am gravely offended by this; as a Christian, I feel I am being disenfranchised from the Country my forebears built; and as a California voter... I am not going to put up with it.


    Report abuse

    Joe Ratzinger wrote on March 03, 2009 01:06 PM: It is too bad that some Jews are so prejudice that they want to take down every cross. Look what they did to the L.A. county seal.


    Report abuse

    Atheists wrote on March 02, 2009 04:55 PM: Shoving their religion down our throats again.


    Report abuse

    foobar wrote on March 02, 2009 03:30 PM: The fact that the 9th circuit court of appeals wants the cross down means it is going to stay. They are the most overturned appeals court in the nation because they are composed of nutjobs. The Supreme Court seems to take great pleasure in handing them their rear ends every time they hear appeals coming out of the nutjob circuit.


    Report abuse

    Atheist wrote on March 02, 2009 02:27 PM: I'm atheist and stuff like this ticks me off. That cross has been there since the 30's and the ACLU has nothing better to do than sue? Who gives a crap, its not like they're handing out bibles in public schools its a cross thats been there for over 70 years? As an atheist i take ZERO offense and hate when the ACLU makes something out of nothing. Certainly our forefathers wanted to separate church and state to avoid the type of power that Pope's had way back in the day, a cross in the Mojave is a far cry... Just because you dont believe in God doesnt mean you have to ruin it for everybody else, i dont expect to have religion shoved down my throat and i wont shove atheism down your, leave the damn cross


    Report abuse

    NV Voter wrote on March 02, 2009 12:14 PM: Looney,

    Perhaps you should read my post more carefully. I did not state the Constitution discussed separation of church and state, merely that it was a concept that guided our first fathers. Please refer to the various writings of the era, including Jefferson and Hamilton.

    It is quite common for a Court to overturn an illegal land sale and deem it not to have occurred. This will be overturned and we are fortunate the Supreme Court is comprised of legal scholars who understand the underlying principle at stake here.





    Report abuse

    dosboot wrote on March 02, 2009 11:07 AM: Don't be mislead. Our Founding Fathers included a reference to the Christian Lord in the United States Constitution.

    From Article VII:

    "Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independence of the United States of America the Twelfth."



    Report abuse

    The looney left at it again wrote on March 02, 2009 10:43 AM: NV Voter,

    Please read the Constitution and tell me where it discusses separation of church and state.

    You will not find it. Freedom from a government forced religion is what our founding fathers wanted. Using a single court ruling to create a fictitious line in our founding documents is common practice.

    The land no longer belongs to the federal government anyways.

    The 9th Circus = the most overturned court in the nation.


    Report abuse

    Free Nevada wrote on March 02, 2009 10:41 AM: LA Times coverage.

    "Buono, a Roman Catholic, alleged that the cross was an unconstitutional religious display on public land."

    I'm not sure it's the same one, but when I first noticed the huge cross on the peak overlooking I-15 in that area was missing (I've been driving by it for 20 years now), I thought it was vandalism and it made me feel sick like learning about the attacks in New York. (I'm not the sensitive type either.) I never thought of that marker in religious terms --it was part of the land, like Bible Peak on Catalina or the hundreds of year-old Missions throughout California. There's enough land out there for everyone and there's nothing around that cross for miles that would in any way suggest government endorsement.


    Read All Comments