Uncategorized

ANN ARBOR, MI – Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, received this year’s Eagle Forum Award for the State of Michigan.  The Eagle Forum is a national pro-family, pro-life, conservative organization started by the renowned conservative activist, Phyllis Schlafly, in the 1970’s.

Every year, an individual is selected from each state who has contributed to the goals and ideals of the Eagle Forum as set forth by Phyllis Schlafly at its founding.  The award to Thompson was presented during a day-long seminar sponsored by the Eagle Forum of Michigan held in Birmingham, Michigan.  The plaque inscribed by Phyllis Schlafly related it was in appreciation for Thompson’s “dedicated work for God, Family and Country.”

Violet Vestevich, president of the Eagle Forum of Michigan, presented the Award to Thompson,

“This year we are proud to present the Eagle Forum Award to Mr. Richard Thompson for his tireless defense of life, for his fight against Dr. Death (Dr. Kevorkian), and his continued effort heading the Thomas More Law Center to protect the Christian and religious heritage of this country.”

In accepting the award on behalf of all the staff of the Law Center, Thompson expressed his deep personal admiration for Phyllis Schlafly and the work of the Eagle Forum.

Thompson’s 45 minute speech on Sharia law to the packed auditorium dealt with the internal threat posed to the United States by those Muslims who follow Sharia law.  He debunked the notion advanced by many of our political leaders that “Islam is a religion of peace.”  He referred to the remarks of Omar Ahmad, one of the founders of CAIR (Counsel on American-Islamic Relations), that Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant.

According to Thompson, Muslims who believe in Sharia law seek to destroy America because their religion demands it.  This is their holy war, jihad, against non-Muslims.  No amount of compromise and accommodation will quench that hate.  It merely emboldens them.

Thompson expressed his concern that too many Americans are ill-informed about the true nature of Islam and so are fertile grounds for Islamic propaganda.  Muslims seeking to overthrow our government and values waging a campaign of “Stealth Jihad” have infiltrated every level of our national government, our two main political parties, and major universities.

Thompson cautioned that Americans should be aware of the Islamic concept of Taqiyya, which allows devout Muslims to lie, even act as a non-Muslim, if in their opinion; it will be good for Islam.  Since the goal of Jihad is to make Islam supreme, every lie to achieve that goal is acceptable.  For instance when Muslims are weaker than their opponents, they will feign “Islam is a religion of peace.”

The Thomas More Law Center defends and promotes America’s Christian heritage and moral values, including the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life.  It supports a strong national defense and an independent and sovereign United States of America.  The Law Center accomplishes its mission through litigation, education, and related activities.  It does not charge for its services.  The Law Center is supported by contributions from individuals, corporations and foundations, and is recognized by the IRS as a section 501(c)(3) organization.  You may reach the Thomas More Law Center at (734) 827-2001 or visit our website at www.thomasmore.org.

ANN ARBOR, MI – The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit granted the Thomas More Law Center’s petition for en banc (full court) review of a three-judge panel opinion, which upheld a San Francisco City Board resolution virulently condemning the Catholic Church for its moral teachings on homosexuality.

The Thomas More Law Center, a national Christian legal advocacy group based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, promptly filed a petition for en banc review.  Click here to read Law Center petition.  In its order granting the petition, the Ninth Circuit vacated the prior ruling, stating, “The three-judge panel opinion shall not be cited as precedent by or to any court in the Ninth Circuit.”  Click here to read the order.  The case will now be reargued to the full court, which will consist of all judges eligible to hear the case (approximately 11 judges).

The anti-Catholic resolution, adopted March 21, 2006, was challenged by the Law Center on behalf of the Catholic League and two Catholic residents of San Francisco. The Board’s resolution refers to the Vatican as a “foreign country” meddling in the affairs of the City and proclaims the Church’s moral teaching and beliefs on homosexuality as “insulting to all San Franciscans,” “hateful,” “insulting and callous,” “defamatory,” “absolutely unacceptable,”  “insensitive[] and ignoran[t].”  Click here to read the City’s resolution.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel for the Law Center, commented, “In total disregard for our Constitution, homosexual activists in positions of power in San Francisco abused their authority as government officials to attack the Catholic Church.  Our constitution plainly forbids government hostility toward religion, including the Catholic faith.  And we are fully committed to fighting homosexual activists who seek to promote their personal political agenda at the expense of our constitutional freedoms.”

The Law Center’s lawsuit claimed the City’s anti-Catholic resolution violated the First Amendment, which “forbids an official purpose to disapprove of a particular religion, religious beliefs, or of religion in general.”  The Board’s resolution went so far as to urge the Archbishop of San Francisco and Catholic Charities of San Francisco to defy Church directives.  Click here to read the Law Center’s complaint filed on behalf of the Catholic League against the City.

The unanimous decision by the three-judge panel did have an interesting concurrence from Judge Berzon.  Click here to read the three-judge opinion.  In Judge Berzon’s concurring opinion, she states in part, “All of that said, I do find the result troublesome, and find much to agree with in Judge Noonan’s eloquent dissent in American Family. . . In particular, I am acutely aware that ‘the Constitution assures religious believers that units of government will not take positions that amount to the establishment of a policy condemning their religious belief,’ . . . and that resolutions such as the ones in American Family and the one in this case are near – if not at – the line that separates establishment of such a policy.”

Robert Muise, the Law Center attorney who is handling the case, stated, “This is a significant case on many fronts.  Should the full court ultimately render a decision in our favor, this case will establish much needed precedent for claims alleging government hostility toward religion.  If the full court allows this government attack on Catholics to stand, it will likely further embolden anti-Christian attacks by government.  However, the fact that a majority of judges vacated the unanimous ruling and agreed to rehear the case en banc is a very good sign.”

According to Catholic doctrine, allowing children to be adopted by homosexuals would actually mean doing violence to these children, in the sense that their condition of dependency would be used to place them in an environment that is not conducive to their full human development.  Such policies are gravely immoral and Catholic organizations must not place children for adoption in homosexual households.

The Law Center argued that the “anti-Catholic resolution sends a clear message to Plaintiffs and others who are faithful adherents to the Catholic faith that they are outsiders, not full members of the political community, and an accompanying message that those who oppose Catholic religious beliefs, particularly with regard to homosexual unions and adoptions by homosexual partners, are insiders, favored members of the political community.”

The Thomas More Law Center defends and promotes America’s Christian heritage and moral values, including the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life.  It supports a strong national defense and an independent and sovereign United States of America.  The Law Center accomplishes its mission through litigation, education, and related activities.  It does not charge for its services.  The Law Center is supported by contributions from individuals, corporations and foundations, and is recognized by the IRS as a section 501(c)(3) organization.  You may reach the Thomas More Law Center at (734) 827-2001 or visit our website at www.thomasmore.org.

ANN ARBOR, MI — For 63 years, a privately maintained nativity scene has been displayed during the Christmas season on a public median in Warren, Michigan.  That 63 year-old tradition was abruptly ended by the Macomb County Road Commission, which controls private displays on public medians in the county, after it received a threatening letter from the Freedom From Religion Foundation, an atheist organization that has as its aim the removal of all religious symbols from the public square.  Rather than stand up to the atheists, the Road Commission ordered the removal of the private nativity scene, in violation of the Constitution.

Last Friday, the Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of Warren city resident John Satawa against the Road Commission for its discriminatory decision to ban the private display.  The purpose of the lawsuit is to obtain a declaratory judgment that the Road Commission’s actions were unconstitutional and to obtain a court order permitting the nativity display.  The case has been assigned to U.S. District Court Judge Gerald Rosen, Chief Judge of the Eastern District of Michigan. [link to lawsuit]

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Law Center, commented, “Every Christmas holiday, militant atheists, acting like the Taliban, use the phrase  ‘separation of church and state,’ — nowhere found in our constitution — as a means of intimidating municipalities and schools into removing expressions celebrating Christmas, a National Holiday.  Their goal is to cleanse our public square of all Christian symbols.  However, the grand purpose of our Founding Fathers and the First Amendment was to protect religion, not eliminate it.  Municipalities and schools should be aware that the systematic exclusion of Christmas symbols during the holiday season is itself inconsistent with the Constitution.”

In 1945, St. Anne’s Parish was established in the Village of Warren.  During its first year of existence, a set of Christmas statues depicting the nativity scene was donated to the Catholic church.  The statues were too large to display on the inside of the church, so some members of the congregation thought it would be a good idea to display the statues and a manger in the center of the village during the Christmas holiday season.  The President of the Village at the time granted permission to display the nativity scene on the median between Mound and Chicago Roads in Warren.  As a result, a Christmas tradition was born.

Since 1945, a Christmas nativity display has been erected at this location in Warren by John Satawa and members of his family.  Satawa took over the responsibility of erecting the nativity display after his father, Mr. Joseph Satawa, passed away in 1965.  Over the years, members of the community, private businesses and organizations, including a Boy Scout Troop from St. Anne’s Parish, have assisted in keeping the Christmas tradition alive — a tradition that militant atheists abhor.

The Freedom From Religion’s threatening letter claimed the presence of the nativity display on the public median violated the “constitutional principle of separation of church and state.” [link to letter]

In December 2008, after receiving the threatening letter, the Road Commission demanded Satawa “immediately remove” his nativity display because he had not obtained the appropriate permit to display it on the public median.  The Road Commission has a permit application process whereby private citizens and organizations can request permission to display structures on public rights-of-way, such as medians.  In fact, the median in question has several structures that were erected by a private organization, including old farming equipment and wagons, to maintain the “village” nature of the city.  Consequently, Satawa acquired a permit application from the Road Commission and promptly submitted it so as to obtain a permit to display his nativity scene during the upcoming 2009 Christmas holiday season.  Unfortunately, the Road Commission denied the permit, erroneously claiming it must do so because the private nativity scene “clearly displays a religious message” in violation of the “separation of church and state.”

Robert Muise, the Law Center attorney handling the matter, commented, “The United States Supreme Court has long held that all public streets, which includes public medians, are held in the public trust and are properly considered traditional public forums for private speech.  Moreover, the Supreme Court has also stated that ‘private religious speech, far from being a First Amendment orphan, is as fully protected under the Free Speech Clause as secular private expression.’ Consequently, by restricting speech because it is religious expression, the Road Commission is imposing a content-based restriction on private speech in a traditional public forum in clear violation of the Constitution.”

The lawsuit alleges that the Road Commission’s content-based restriction on Satawa’s private religious expression violates the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment and the equal protection guarantee of the Fourteenth Amendment.  The lawsuit also alleges that the Road Commission’s policy decision violates the Establishment Clause by disfavoring religion.

The Thomas More Law Center defends and promotes America’s Christian heritage and moral values, including the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life.  It supports a strong national defense and an independent and sovereign United States of America.  The Law Center accomplishes its mission through litigation, education, and related activities.  It does not charge for its services.  The Law Center is supported by contributions from individuals, corporations and foundations, and is recognized by the IRS as a section 501(c)(3) organization.  You may reach the Thomas More Law Center at (734) 827-2001 or visit our website at www.thomasmore.org.

ANN ARBOR, MI – Tomorrow, the U.S. Supreme court will hear oral argument in Salazar v. Buono, an appeal challenging the ACLU’s lawsuit to remove an eight-foot metal cross erected in 1934.  The cross was erected on Sunrise Rock in California’s Mojave Desert by Veterans of Foreign Wars.  Thus far, Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has sided with the ACLU’s anti-cross efforts on the grounds the cross violates the so-called separation of church and state. As an affront to Christians, the cross is now covered by a wooden box to hide it from public view until the appeal is resolved.
When the Supreme Court considers the Mojave cross case on Wednesday, it will have in its file a compelling brief supporting the use of crosses in war memorials filed by the Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan.  (Click here to read brief.)  Joining the Law Center’s brief is the Individual Rights Foundation.

Richard Thompson, the President and Chief Counsel for the Law Center, commented, “The ACLU hates crosses as much as vampires hate crosses or the daylight.  Despite their claims to the contrary, this case is part of the ACLU’s national agenda to incrementally remove every cross on public land.  Their guiding principle is ‘out of sight out of mind.’  The Court’s ruling in this case will impact crosses in thousands of memorials nationwide.”

The military has a long tradition of using the cross to represent honor, courage, and sacrifice.  In fact, the Distinguished Service Cross is our nation’s second-highest military honor.  It was first awarded nearly a century ago during World War I and honors service men and women of all faiths who demonstrate extraordinary valor.

For many years, the Thomas More Law Center has been actively involved in the successful defense of the Mt. Soledad cross, which is part of a national war memorial located in San Diego, California, against ACLU attacks.  The Ninth Circuit is currently considering the ACLU’s appeal of a lower court’s favorable ruling in that case.  A decision by the Supreme Court in the Mojave cross case will likely affect the Mt. Soledad Veterans Memorial as well.

The Law Center’s brief was filed on behalf of former Navy pilot and Vietnam prisoner of war, Rear Admiral Jeremiah Denton, USN (Ret.), and the families of Marine Majors Michael D. Martino and Gerald Bloomfield, III, both of whom were killed in combat in Iraq on November 2, 2005, when their attack helicopter was shot down by a surface-to-air missile.  The memories and sacrifices of these war heroes are now preserved by plaques located under the cross at the Mt. Soledad Veterans Memorial.

Jeremiah Denton, a retired U.S. Navy Rear Admiral, a veteran of World War II, Korea, and Vietnam, a prisoner of war from July 18, 1965 to February 13, 1973, and a former U.S. Senator from the State of Alabama, also serves as the Chairman of the Thomas More Law Center’s Advisory Board.  Admiral Denton first came to the attention of the American public during a television interview arranged by his North Vietnamese captors in 1966.  Expected to give “proper responses” to a journalist’s recitation of alleged American war atrocities, Admiral Denton affirmed his faith in America, stating, “I will support it as long as I live.”  While responding to questions from his interrogator, Admiral Denton blinked his eyes in Morse Code, repeatedly spelling out the covert message “TORTURE.”  His message was the first confirmation that American POWs were being tortured.

During his nearly eight years as a POW, Admiral Denton was subjected to severe torture.  He became the first American military captive to be subjected to four years of solitary confinement.  Admiral Denton’s extraordinary account of his endurance and sacrifice for our country while imprisoned in North Vietnam was told in his 1976 book, When Hell Was in Session.

In 2008, Admiral Denton’s incredible sacrifice for our country – a horrific sacrifice that is unimaginable to most Americans – was honored and memorialized at the Mt. Soledad Veterans Memorial.  A plaque in his honor was placed under the cross at the veterans’ memorial during a ceremony held on September 19, 2008, the 2008 National POW/MIA Recognition Day.

Previously, in May 2006, Major Martino and Major Bloomfield’s unit, which had recently returned from Iraq, sponsored a plaque-dedication ceremony at the memorial to commemorate the fallen Marines’ heroic service and to provide a place to honor them.  More than three hundred Marines stood in line in the hot sun for over three hours to meet the Marines’ families and to pay respect for their fallen comrades.

These ceremonies reveal the importance of such memorials, which provide a lasting tribute to our service men and women.  They provide places where family members, friends, and comrades of our war veterans can pay tribute to their heroes’ sacrifices.  Consequently, these memorials, including the crosses, convey an unmistakably American message of patriotism and self-sacrifice; they do not “establish” Christianity as a national religion, as the ACLU and others who are hostile to religion contend.

Robert Muise, the Thomas More Law Center attorney who authored the brief, is a former Marine officer himself.  Said Muise, “Our brief demonstrates that removing crosses from veterans’ memorials will cause real, irreparable harm to our war heroes and their grieving families, as compared with the contrived ‘harm’ the ACLU and others who are hostile to religion will ‘feel’ because the memorial crosses remain.  Indeed, those that are hostile to our religious heritage are creating the very sort of religiously-based divisiveness that our Constitution was designed to prohibit.”

The Thomas More Law Center defends and promotes America’s Christian heritage and moral values, including the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life.  It supports a strong national defense and an independent and sovereign United States of America.  The Law Center accomplishes its mission through litigation, education, and related activities.  It does not charge for its services.  The Law Center is supported by contributions from individuals, corporations, and foundations, and is recognized by the IRS as a section 501(c)(3) organization.  You may reach the Thomas More Law Center at (734) 827-2001 or visit our website at www.thomasmore.org.