What do people think the Constitution requires as to American cross medals?

Finkelman, Paul <paul.finkelman@albanylaw.edu> Paul.Finkelman at albanylaw.edu
Fri Apr 23 10:26:59 PDT 2010


as I noted in another post; they are not religious crosses; look at them.  


*************************************************
Paul Finkelman, Ph.D.
President William McKinley Distinguished Professor of Law
Albany Law School
80 New Scotland Avenue
Albany, NY 12208

518-445-3386 (p)
518-445-3363 (f)

paul.finkelman at albanylaw.edu
www.paulfinkelman.com
*************************************************
________________________________________
From: conlawprof-bounces at lists.ucla.edu [conlawprof-bounces at lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Robert Sheridan [rs at robertsheridan.com]
Sent: Friday, April 23, 2010 1:23 PM
To: Volokh, Eugene
Cc: 'conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu'
Subject: Re: What do people think the Constitution requires as to American      cross   medals?

The problem with changing the design for these medals and decorations
now is that there doesn't seem to be a compelling need. Jews and Muslims
are not demanding action as a matter of religious freedom, unlike, by
comparison, the case of the appearance of a cross above a city.

Perhaps a calculation has been made by potential objectors that they
don't have standing, not being a medal winner, or that the politics of
the moment are not ready or ripe. The plaintiff in the Under God case a
few years ago may have had doctrine on his side, but he didn't have the
momentum seen in cases of anti-Black and anti-Gay forms of
discrimination. Plaintiffs are entitled to pick their battles with care
and would be well-advised to do so.

Nevertheless, I suspect that if military decorations were first being
instituted today, there would be greater sensitivity to the plural
nature of the country, and hesitation, before using the cross as the
symbol of the nation's recognition, honor, and gratitude.

rs

Volokh, Eugene wrote:
>
> The recent discussion makes me ask this – does the Establishment
> Clause require the U.S. government to change the design and the name
> of the Distinguished Service Cross, the Navy Cross, and the
> Distinguished Flying Cross? Or is the history of those medals
> sufficient to justify retaining them, even if it were impermissible to
> create them today?
>
> I’m not asking what we think the government ought to do, as a matter
> of sound policy (which would of course require it to consider the
> interests of non-Christians who might object to the medals, as well as
> those people, Christian and not, who might object to a change away
> from tradition). I’m asking what, if anything, the government should
> be /required/ to do by the courts, based on their understanding of the
> ban on laws respecting an establishment of religion.
>
> Eugene
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> To post, send message to Conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/conlawprof
>
> Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
_______________________________________________
To post, send message to Conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/conlawprof

Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.


More information about the Conlawprof mailing list