Published: August 27, 2008 07:05 am            

Magistrates vote to continue battle with ACLU

Ten Commandments case still alive

Once again Pulaski County Fiscal Court has voted to continue its battle to display the Ten Commandments.

On Tuesday magistrates unanimously voted to appeal a ruling handed down earlier this month from U.S. District Court Judge Jennifer Coffman which granted the ACLU a permanent injunction on the displays. However she agreed to look at the possibility of summery judgment on behalf of Pulaski and McCreary counties.

The court’s decision came after they went into executive session to discuss the pending litigation for 30 minutes.

After coming out of session Pulaski County Judge-Executive Barty Bullock said no action was taken in the session and then County Attorney Bill Thompson explained that Liberty Counsel was asking for permission to appeal the decision.

“Why put the Ten Commandments up when you don’t intend to go by them,” asked citizen Don Cooper following the court’s decision to appeal.

However, before the court could answer, Thompson advised them not to respond to the question.

This makes the second time in Pulaski County Judge-Executive Barty Bullock’s administration that fiscal court has approved continuing the suit — which began nearly a decade ago under a previous administration.

“When you believe in something you just have to keep fighting ... and I believe in this lawsuit,” said Mike Strunk, fifth district magistrate.

Meanwhile, Kenny Isaacs, the lone magistrate remaining from the fiscal court that began the battle, said he believes the case just needs to go before the right judge. He noted other rulings have been favorable toward the display of the Ten Commandments.

“It’s just the right thing to do and that is the way I feel about it,” said Glenn Maxey, fourth district magistrate.

In June 2005, in a split-decision, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the ACLU’s injunction to keep the display off McCreary and Pulaski County’s public walls. The case was sent back to U.S. District Court for final resolution.

Mathew Staver, founder of Liberty Counsel and dean of Liberty University School of Law, called the recent court order from Coffman “confusing.”

With both Pulaski and McCreary counties opting to continue the fight, the case could be headed back to the U.S. Sixth Circuit Court in Cincinnati.

“We believe this is constitutional and we will go back to the court of appeals in Cincinnati,” said Staver.

Meanwhile, ACLU attorney David Friedman is confident the Sixth Circuit will determine Judge Coffman got the ruling right.

“We think she did,” said Friedman. “We’ll happily defend her ruling, and we’re optimistic about the outcome.”

Staver told the Commonwealth Journal on Monday that the case is not to the point of thinking about how much money the counties could owe the ACLU if the case were to end.

“We don’t believe they are entitled to any attorney fees,” said Staver.

Friedman told the Commonwealth Journal the ACLU fees or costs motion is due next week and at that point “everyone will see what the total cost is for the case.”

Though Friedman did not speculate on a fee, The McCreary Record reported that McCreary County Judge-Executive Blaine Phillips said the ACLU was seeking more than $500,000, which would be split between McCreary and Pulaski Counties.

As far as Pulaski County owing Liberty Counsel anything for its work on the case, Staver said that wouldn’t happen.

“The county won’t have to pay for any of Liberty Counsel’s time under any circumstances,” Staver said.

According to Arlene Young, treasurer of Pulaski County, the last time the county paid any money in regard to the Ten Commandments case was in November of 2000. At that time, she said, the county paid $36,602.83. Of that money $12,223.77 went to Amshoff and Amshoff, $15,379.06 went to Richard Ray and $4,000 went to Liberty Counsel. Young said all of that $36,602.83 that was paid came from donations and not the counties checkbook.

County Attorney Bill Thompson said on Tuesday he believed “it would be naive” not to be concerned about a possible monetary judgement in favor of the ACLU.

“Anytime you go to court there is a concern about cost,” said Isaacs. “But it’s hard to walk away from something when you feel you have a strong case.”

Maxey said the case was something carried over when this court came in and said he didn’t feel they could just drop the case.

“We’re in to deep to just drop it,” said Maxey “... If we drop it we owe money and if fight it and win we won’t owe money. And I feel like we can win.”

•••

Janie Slaven of McCreary County Record contributed to the story.

        

• Click to discuss this story with other readers on our forums.