Pulaski pays $230,000 in fees in 10 Commandments case

This from the Herald-Leader:

Pulaski County has paid $231,662 to cover its share of costs in a legal battle the county lost over attempts to post copies of the Ten Commandments in the courthouse.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky received the check Friday, according to a news release.

The county fiscal court took out a loan to get the money.

The payment ends Pulaski County's part in a court fight that lasted more than 11 years, in which a federal judge ruled that Pulaski and McCreary counties' posting copies of the Commandments violated the U.S. Constitution.

The counties owed the ACLU a total of more than $460,000 in legal fees and interest because of the organization's successful legal challenge to the displays.

McCreary County has not yet paid its share of the judgment. Its payment will be somewhat higher than Pulaski County's because interest continues to accrue on its portion of the debt.

McCreary County Judge-Executive Doug Stephens said Friday that the fiscal court plans to borrow money from a local bank to pay the judgment...

Let the national ridicule begin

This from Rachel Maddow at MSNBC:



Hat tip to Page 1.

H-L: Correction on 10 Commandments Case

KSN&C Backstory here.

This from the Herald-Leader with an AP tag:

Correction: Ten Commandments-Kentucky story

The Associated Press

LOUISVILLE, Ky. -- In a Nov. 28 story about a Ten Commandments case in Grayson County, The Associated Press reported erroneously that two attorneys would split more than $44,000 in attorneys fees awarded by a judge.

U.S. District Judge Joseph H. McKinley awarded the attorney fees to the plaintiffs - Raymond Harper, Ed Meredith and the American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky - who won an injunction against displaying the commandments in the county courthouse. They were represented by ACLU attorneys David Friedman and
William E. Sharp, but the judge's order did not specify the disposition of the fees.

What Establishment of Religion Looks Like

This from H-L, Cartoon by Joel Pett:

Atheists want God out of Ky. homeland security

A group of atheists filed a lawsuit Tuesday seeking to remove part of a state anti-terrorism law that requires Kentucky's Office of Homeland Security to acknowledge it can't keep the state safe without God's help.

American Atheists Inc. sued in state court over a 2002 law that stresses God's role in Kentucky's homeland security alongside the military, police agencies and health departments.

Of particular concern is a 2006 clause requiring the Office of Homeland Security to post a plaque that says the safety and security of the state "cannot be achieved apart from reliance upon almighty God" and to stress that fact through training and educational materials.

The plaque, posted at the Kentucky Emergency Operations Center in Frankfort, includes the Bible verse: "Except the Lord keep the city, the watchman waketh but in vain." ...

Establishment. Plain and simple.

Attorneys to split fees in 10 Commandments case

This from the Herald-Leader:

LOUISVILLE — Two attorneys have been awarded more than $44,000 in fees after winning a battle over the public display of the Ten Commandments at a Kentucky courthouse.

U.S. District Judge Joseph H. McKinley said attorneys David Friedman and William E. Sharp, both of whom argued the case for the American Civil Liberties Union, should split $44,208 after winning a permanent injunction keeping the text out of the courthouse...

The U.S. Supreme Court in 2005 ruled that displays inside the McCreary and Pulaski county courthouses were unconstitutional while the U.S. 6th District Court of Appeals said a Mercer County Courthouse display that incorporated other historical documents was constitutional.

Since then, Ten Commandments displays and monuments in Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, Maryland, Nebraska, Ohio, Tennessee and West Virginia have been challenged and taken down.

ACLU seeks $400,000 for Ten Commandments cases

Talk about wasted money...

This from H-L:

A long legal fight over courthouse displays of the Ten Commandments could cost two Southern Kentucky counties nearly $400,000.

In a motion filed this week, attorneys with the American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky requested fees of $390,588 for representing people who challenged the displays in the halls of the Pulaski and McCreary County courthouses, plus $8,133 in expenses.

The request comes after the ACLU won its request for an injunction barring the displays. Congress approved rules decades ago under which the losers in civil-rights cases must pay the legal fees of the winners.

The goal was to make it possible for citizens and attorneys to pursue potentially expensive lawsuits to defend civil rights and uphold constitutional principles when government doesn't do the right thing, said David A. Friedman, the lead attorney for the ACLU on the case.

"It's a core economic principle for how everyone's civil rights and civil liberties can be protected and defended when government acts in a lawless way," Friedman said...

Beshear comments on Ten Commandments in Pulaski Co

This from the Commonwealth Journal:

An audience of nearly 300 people attended a town hall meeting Monday to ask questions and hear comments from Gov. Steve Beshear concerning the local community and the state alike.

...Beshear... touched on several controversial subjects during the meeting, including the hanging of the Ten Commandments in public schools and government buildings.

Former Gov. Fletcher issued an executive order during his term ordering that the document be hung in public schools.When asked whether he would support the action, Beshear said he would leave that decision up to the Kentucky Supreme Court.

“I personally from the state’s standpoint am not going to try to get us into a lawsuit or a bunch of lawsuits where I’ve got to spend your tax dollars on litigating that issues,” Beshear said. “We’ve got enough problems trying to educate our kids and get better health care for our people.”

“That’s what I’m going to try to concentrate on and whatever the Supreme Court says we’ll do then we’ll do,” he finished.

Several audience members asked about the limited funding afforded to state programs in the face of a nearly $1 billion shortfall in the state’s budget for the next two fiscal years, such as teachers’ and other state employees’ retirement pensions.

Beshear said he is working to promote preventative health care and wellness throughout the state in an effort to significantly reduce the cost of health insurance for state employees.“ ...

Justice recounts cases on Commandments

This from C-J, Photo by Bill Luster.

Breyer speaks at author forum

In 2005, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer wrote a concurring opinion with the majority in ruling that Ten Commandments displays in two Kentucky courthouses were unconstitutional -- yet one at the Texas Capitol was not and could stay.

"I can't find even one person who thinks I did the right thing," Breyer told more than 500 people at last night's Kentucky Author Forum at the Kentucky Center.

"A lot of people would like them both to be unlawful and a lot of people would like them both to be lawful."

The case was a good illustration of one of Breyer's main points last night: Justices often need to look at the purpose behind the Constitution, not just the strict language.

While the First Amendment says that Congress shall make no law establishing religion, it leaves unclear whether a religious document can be used for secular purposes, such as teaching the history of a religion, Breyer said.

In Texas, the tablet was not erected for religious purposes and, in fact, was one of many posted around the country by director Cecil B. DeMille when he was promoting his 1956 movie, "The Ten Commandments," Breyer said.

"If we say that violates the Constitution, the people who don't want any monuments will go around the country chiseling off Ten Commandments from every public building in every city in the United States, and what's that going to do for religious harmony?" he said. "Well, I don't think it will promote it."

But in Kentucky, officials were intent on proving to the Supreme Court that they could post the Ten Commandments, "and it seemed pretty clear from the
background that they had a religious purpose in mind," he said.

"If we say that's OK, we'll have religious use of religious documents in courthouses throughout the country," Breyer, author of "Active Liberty," said...

No Gold in the Golden Rule Act

Don't get me wrong, Governor Steve beshear should sign the anti-bully HB 91. The poisionous provisions penned by Senate President David Williams have been removed by a conference committee.

And, I'm not holding myself up as an example for anyone when it comes to religion.

But I don't know why the press continues to identify House Bill 91 as the "Golden Rule Act." Williams removed the Golden Rule as soon as he got his hands on it in mid March.

Mike Cherry's excellent measure passed the House 96-0 with the following language, "Amend KRS 158.440 to identify the Golden Rule as the model for improving attitude and the rule for conduct for all public school students..."

Williams took that language out.

For a guy who supports posting the Ten Commandments on public buildings, William's move seems ...unenlightened to me.

So, I wrote to Senator Williams recently in an effort to learn his rationale.

It went something like this...

Senator Williams,

It seems you have always supported posting of the Ten Commandments.

For that reason, I'm confused as to why you took language out of the HB 91 that would have required schools to use the central teaching of Jesus in disciplining Kentucky students. Can you help me understand that?

Do you have a better foundation for public school discipline in mind?

Are you not concerned that rejecting the Golden Rule, which is common to all major religions and therefore might survive a court challenge, while promoting the Ten Commandments, which are uniquely Judaeo-Christian, only serves to give the court more evidence that posting the Commandments is truly an unconstitutional attempt to establish religion?

Respectfully,

Richard Day
Kentucky School News and Commentary

I haven't heard back yet.

No ancient law or prophesy could possibly be more "Christian" than the teachings of Jesus himself. Clearly "the Golden Rule" is central to Christianity. A public school disciplinary code that keeps the Golden Rule, keeps the faith.

But that's NOT why it should be the basis for student discipline in the public schools.

The Golden Rule should be the basis for all student discipline because it is also central to all major religions - and I've never heard an atheist or agnostic object to its principles either.

Because of its wide-spread acceptance among the world's religions, it does not establish religion the way that posting the Ten Commandments would. ...or requiring daily reading from the Qur'an would. ...or requiring transcendental meditation would. ...or teaching transubstantiation would. Those acts would be specific to a particular religion, and would therefore be unconstitutional.

For some, posting the Ten commandments is a political ploy. For most, I hope, it is a sincere desire to see our children reared with moral principles. In the latter sense, it's the right idea - but the wrong number. We should post the "second commandment" only.

One of the problems facing Ten Commandments-posting advocates is, once the courts have evidence that the true motivation behind the desire to post them is religious, and therefore unconstitutional, it's hard to get the court to forget by simply adding on a few other documents.

Whining about the Ten Commandments while rejecting the Golden Rule is counter-productive to our children's best interest.

A synopsis of the surviving language in the Conference Committee Report from KyVotes.org follows:

Create a new section of KRS Chapter 158 to require school personnel to report incidents of student felony offenses under KRS Chapter 508 to law enforcement and parents of students involved;

amend KRS 158.444 to require a local school district to include in its statewide data report all incidents in which a student has been disciplined by the school for a serious offense, including the nature of the offense, and all incidents in which a student has been charged criminally for any offense identified in KRS Chapter 508 or in Section 4 of this Act that occurred on school premises, on the school bus, or at school functions;

require the Kentucky Department of Education to submit to the Office of Education Accountability and the Education Assessment and Accountability Review Committee an annual statistical report, rather than a monthly statistical report, to include the number and types of incidents of violence or assault against school employees and students, possession of guns or other deadly weapons on school property or at school functions, and possession or use of alcohol, prescription drugs, or controlled substances on school property or at school functions;

require the annual statistical report to include monthly data and cumulative data for the reporting year; set the reporting period as an academic year, delivered by August 31 of each year;

amend KRS 158.148 to require the Kentucky Department of Education, in consultation with various professional agencies, to develop or update as needed, a model policy to be distributed to schools by August 31 of each even-numbered year, beginning August 31, 2008;

amend KRS 525.070 to identify specific activities done by a student as harassment;

amend KRS 525.080 to identify specific activities done by a student as harassing communication.

Judge stops Grayson County from displaying Ten Commandments

This from the Herald-Leader:

LOUISVILLE, Ky. --A federal judge has permanently barred a Kentucky county from using the Ten Commandments as part of a "Foundations of American Law and
Government" display.

U.S. District Judge Joseph H. McKinley said the Grayson County display has the "effect of endorsing religion." McKinley's ruling upholds a preliminary injunction issued in 2002 that resulted in county officials taking down the Ten Commandments, but leaving the frame on display.

No public money was used to set up the display in the county courthouse in Leitchfield, about 75 miles southwest of Louisville.

The Rev. Chester Shartzer put up the display, without a public ceremony or public prayer. Two Grayson County residents and the American Civil Liberties Union sued in 2001, claiming the intent of the display was religious and therefore unconstitutional...

The Golden Rule Act: Or, Will David Williams take Jesus out of the schools?

If conservatives want to find out who is "taking God out of the schools" they need to look no further than Senate President David Williams.

Williams is comfortable enough pandering to the fundamentalist crowd by supporting Ten Commandments legislation every chance he gets. But what explanation might he provide for removing the central teachings of Jesus from the Anti-Bullying bill currently in conference committee.

Mike Cherry's version of House Bill 91 contained this language:

"...amend KRS 158.148 to require school districts to formulate a code of acceptable behavior and discipline that embraces the Golden Rule as the model for improving attitude and the rule for conduct for students..."

David Williams removed that language. Why? What could Williams possibly find objectionable with the "greatest commandment?" The public deserves an explanation.

This from PolWatchers:

Lawmakers seek compromise on anti-bullying bill

Lawmakers negotiating the details of a bill aimed at curbing schoolhouse bullying said they hit no "major snags" on Monday.

The House-Senate conference committee on the "bullying" bill, House Bill 91, met for about 45 minutes Monday afternoon in closed conference. Afterwards, Rep. Mike Cherry, D-Princeton, the bill's sponsor, said "things went well."

"My side presented a compromise piece of legislation that I think was favorably received," Cherry said. He would not go into specifics and would not provide a copy of his proposal. He described it as a blending of the House and Senate versions, "using the Senate as the text."

Cherry's original version, "The Golden Rule Act," would require schools to write codes of conduct that prohibit "harassment, intimidation, or bullying." He added a floor amendment in the House to include "cyberbullying" by electronic communication.

A separate Senate version of the bill had been stalled in committee and Senate Democrats tried repeatedly and unsuccessfully to spring it with a discharge petition.

Instead, Senate President David Williams, R-Burkesville, amended Cherry's version to "put some teeth into it." Schools would be required to report bullying to law enforcement, and would be required to issue a monthly report on all incidents.

Cherry sounded optimistic a compromise finally can be reached. "I don't even see any major snags at this point," Cherry said. "We think the reporting requirement of their side is a little harsh, and monthly reporting is a little much." ...

David Williams' Poison Pill for Bullying Bill

After refusing to allow an anti-bullying bill to move in the Senate for four sessions, Senate President David Williams finally capitulated. Or, did he? After "removing Jesus" from the House's version Williams designed a devilish counter punch.

As Mark Hebert tell us,

"[Williams] says kids who intimidate, harass or embarrass other kids should be sent to the court system where professionals can properly deal with them."

I wonder what Supreme Court Chief Justice Joseph Lambert thinks about that.

Is Williams really that far removed from the reality of today's schools? It's hard enough to get the courts to deal with a persistently violent 10-year old. They don't have anywhere to go with them.

The idea of criminalizing kindergartners who embarrass another student is so misguided that Hebert wonders aloud if Williams' bill is designed to kill itself.

This from Mark Hebert @WHAS.

Sen. Williams' Bully Bill Designed to Kill It???

Little Johnny and Little Susie could be in shackles for harassing their classmates under a new "Bully Bill" proposed by Sen. David Williams today.

Williams' version of the "Bully Bill" unanimously passed the Senate Judiciary Committee and later passed the full senate. The Senate has refused to even hear any version of a "Bully Bill" for the past four legislative sessions. But Senate President Williams has been catching plenty of heat from WHAS Radio talk show host "Francene" for refusing to push for a vote for Rep. Mike Cherry's version of the bill, which unanimously passed the House. So today, the Senate Judiciary Committee heard from Cherry and Williams co-opted his bill with a committee substitute. Here are the highlights:

When a teacher gets wind of a student threatening, harassing or embarrassing another student, the teacher MUST report it to the school principal.

The principal is REQUIRED to report every instance of alleged intimidation or threat to the police or county attorney within 48 hours. The cops or prosecutor are then REQUIRED to investigate the allegation.

Failure to report is a Class B misdemeanor, the same as failure to report suspected child abuse...

Also, Mike Cherry's version of House Bill 91 contained this language:

"...amend KRS 158.148 to require school districts to formulate a code of acceptable behavior and discipline that embraces the Golden Rule as the model for improving attitude and the rule for conduct for students..."

David Williams removed it. Why?

David Adams over at Kentucky Progress writes:

Senate Democrats are up in arms because the House's "bullying" bill got a committee
substitute from President David Williams that doesn't include the word "bullying" or the phrase "The Golden Rule." More symbolism over substance, as usual, from that chamber's minority party.

As a former school principal, I sure see it differently.

In a school system where all children enjoy the same rights (We all want that - right?) Cherry's focus on the Golden Rule is not just symbolism. It is everything. Everything teachers do flows from there. If a student acts in a hurtful way toward another student, schools have a moral obligation to look after those in need of protection. The school is also obliged to help the persecutors learn a better way - not to criminalize them.

No ancient law or prophesy could possibly be more Christian than the teachings of Jesus himself. Clearly "the Golden Rule" is central to Christianity. A public school disciplinary code that keeps the Golden Rule, keeps the faith.

But that's NOT why it should be the basis for student discipline in the public schools.

The Golden Rule should be the basis for all student discipline because it is also central to the other major religions - and I've never heard an atheist or agnostic object to it either.

Because of its wide-spread acceptance among the world's religions, it does not establish religion the way that posting the Ten Commandments would. ...or requiring daily reading from the Qur'an would. ...or requiring transcendental meditation would. ...or teaching transubstantiation would. Those acts would be specific to a particular religion, and would therefore be unconstitutional.

If David Williams has a superior moral basis for guiding Kentucky teachers in the disciplining of their students, let's hear what it is.

Ten Commandments cases have varied results

Harlan display allowed; 2 other counties blocked

A federal judge has rejected a bid by two Eastern Kentucky counties to revive displays of historical documents that included the Ten Commandments that were ruled unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court.

But U.S. District Court Judge Jennifer B. Coffman did refuse to issue a permanent injunction against displays by McCreary and Pulaski counties, which had posted the displays in their courthouses.

She also granted a victory to Harlan County Public Schools, which wants to restore similar displays in school buildings, dismissing a lawsuit over the displays because the student who filed it eight years ago no is longer enrolled in the school system...

..."It's a prayer answered, for not just Harlan County but for America," said Johnnie Turner, an attorney for Harlan County Public Schools.

He maintained the display was purely educational. "Let history be history," he said. "That's all we ask."

He said he'd discuss the case with other lawyers and officials involved before any decision is made on whether to put the exhibits back up.

All of the displays at issue involve an exhibit called "Foundations of American Law and Government," which displays the Ten Commandments along with other historic documents, including the Magna Carta and the lyrics to "The Star-Spangled Banner."

The Supreme Court ruled the displays in McCreary and Pulaski counties were unconstitutional in 2005, saying the county governments were improperly sponsoring religion, as county officials had stated in official resolutions their intent to honor Jesus Christ as the "Prince of Ethics."

They also erected the Foundations of American Law and Government display only after court rulings against earlier displays of the Ten Commandments on their own, or grouped with other explicitly religious documents.

But the Supreme Court's ruling only upheld a preliminary injunction against the displays. The court said the counties' actions didn't "forever taint any effort" to post the Ten Commandments if officials could prove they had "purged" themselves of their original religious intent and were now trying to display the commandments strictly for secular, educational purposes.

Because of that possibility, Coffman denied the bid for a permanent injunction on the displays, sought by the American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky, which brought the lawsuits against the counties...

This from the Courier-Journal.