DULUTH, Minn. - The massive Ten Commandments monument that once stood on the City Hall grounds was thrust back into the news Monday when the U.S. Supreme Court issued a pair of rulings defining how much blending of church and state was permissible.
For Dr. Steve Peterson, an emergency room physician and pastor who fought removal of the 2,500-pound monument, the court's actions were vindication because the rulings said that in some contexts Ten Commandments monuments were constitutional.
"I'm excited that the Supreme Court found that we can keep monuments on public property," said Peterson said. When his effort to save the monument failed, his group bought the monument and had it displayed on private land near a popular park.
On the other hand, Dr. William VanDruten, who sued along with the Minnesota Civil Liberties Union to force the city to remove the monument, said the court's 5-4 decision to let a similar monument stand outside the Texas capitol would not apply in Duluth.
The City Council agreed to remove the monument rather than risk the expense of a trial.
ADVERTISEMENT
"The court did allow one monument to stand ... where they felt it was neutralized by a variety of other monuments," VanDruten said. "Clearly the City Council of Duluth was right to remove this (single) religious icon from the City Hall lawn."
In a related opinion, the court ruled that displaying the Ten Commandments inside Kentucky courthouses was not allowed. The court said the displays were unconstitutional because their religious content is overemphasized
VanDruten applauded that ruling. "They have made it clear that religious monuments or graven images may not be in courthouses," VanDruten said. "... That's always been unconstitutional because America belongs to all of us."
Whether the rulings will change the fate of the Duluth monument, a granite gift made 48 years ago from the Fraternal Order of Eagles, remains to be seen.
The monument sits facing the scenic Lakewalk on the property of a Canal park motel. A stream of walkers can see it and the read a plaque telling how it got there. Patterson said he liked the monument's new home.
"I like this location; a lot of tourists get to see it," he said. He also said he would fight to get it back to City Hall, if enough residents wanted it so. "The mayor and council must admit they were wrong."
