June 27, 2005

Rep. Pitts comments on Ten Commandments rulings

Congressman says decision should not affect Chester County because courts have already ruled, worries about activists

Washington — Congressman Joe Pitts (R, PA-16) today said that the Supreme Court effort to split the difference in where the Ten Commandments could inspire activists who have challenged the Ten Commandments plaque posted at the Chester County Courthouse to renew their challenge, despite previous court rulings that threw their case out.

“Because the courts have already settled the matter of the Chester County Courthouse plaque,” said Congressman Pitts, “I don’t think this will affect us here.  However, I would never put it past activists who have not given up on using the Courts to advance their agenda. 

“The problem is that the people and their elected representatives have completely surrendered any ability to decide on these issues to the Courts, who are more than willing to make national policy on this.  This is not what the Founders intended.

“The American people must be allowed a say in how the government treats the free exercise of religion and free speech.  We can not rely on unelected judges to be sole arbiters on this matter.  And they shouldn’t have the final say in what ideas are acceptable in the public square. 

“Congress can act to return a sense of sanity to the legal system by passing common sense limits to what the Court can rule on.  This is well within Congress’ authority. It’s what the people expect of us.  And it’s how the Founders intended the process to work,” said Congressman Pitts.

In ACLU of Kentucky v. McCreary County, the Court did not rule that all Ten Commandments displays are inherently unconstitutional, but that each display must be scrutinized to determine the intent of displaying them.  Courts have ruled in the past that the Ten Commandments plaque on the Chester County Courthouse passes this constitutional muster.  In Van Orden v. Perry, the Court ruled that the displays must be part of honoring the nation’s legal and religious history. 

#  #  #