![]() |
![]() |
| Donate Online | February 9, 2010 | Printer-Friendly Version |

![]() |
Boise comes after citizens who fought for monumentThe Signup For Updates |Donate Online Friday, June 27, 2008 CITY OF The City of
The June 23 letter says the city of According to a letter received from the Boise City Attorney’s Office, “This Judgment will remain on your credit record until the debt is paid in full.” And if it is not resolved by July 15, the city says, “[W]e will proceed against you to collect the amounts due, plus interests and costs.” You may read the city’s letter here. This matter goes back to the very beginning of our battle with the city in January of 2004. When we got wind of the city’s surreptitious plan to remove the monument – which had stood peacefully in the park since 1965 – Ms. Swindell and I sought an injunction against the city to prevent removal of the monument, in order to give us time to organize a community response. (The city slipped the monument removal item on to its agenda as late as legally possible, concealed it under a euphemistic label, scheduled it for discussion at a pre-council meeting that the public normally does not attend, and had scheduled removal of the monument just three days after the decision was made. We had no option but to move quickly if the city was to be stopped.)
As you are aware, the ACLU has padded its coffers by successfully suing cities on the grounds that the presence of religious monuments offends them. We reasoned that, if being offended is a legitimate basis to initiate legal action, then we had the same right to challenge the city on the grounds that removing this monument offended us. A federal judge, who had ruled in 1995 that a similar monument in Ms. Swindell and I both work for small non-profit organizations and thus have limited means. The city of The city has made no effort to contact us for these last 4 ½ years about this matter, and the very first communication we had from them on the subject So we have until July 15 to find a way to satisfy the city’s demand. Appealing the judge’s 2004 ruling would have required an appeal to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, where its left-leaning tilt means that we would be likely to lose and be at risk for another $80,000 in attorney’s fees. Ms. Swindell and I simply were not in a position to risk that kind of financial exposure. Ms. Swindell and I are asking you to stand with us in the effort we made to protect the public display of the word of God and to protect freedom of religion and speech in If you would like to come to our side, you may contribute to our legal expenses by sending donations to: Keep the Commandments Coalition If you value the work of the IVA in representing our values, please consider a gift to our work. You may do so here. Together we can make |
All Content Copyright Idaho Values Alliance © 2010. All rights reserved. Unauthorized Usage Prohibited. |