
Robert E. Levy
Partner
201-896-7163 rlevy@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Author: Robert E. Levy
Date: August 14, 2014

Partner
201-896-7163 rlevy@sh-law.comThe Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently affirmed the dismissal of a lawsuit that alleged that exhibiting the artifact violated the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution. American Atheists, Inc. v. Port Authority of N.Y. & N.J. revolves around a 17‐foot high column and cross‐beam retrieved from World Trade Center debris that gave many the impression of a Latin cross, a symbol associated with Christianity. Workers removed the beam and erected it onto a platform at the West Street edge of the recovery site, where it eventually became known as the “Cross at Ground Zero.”
Given the significance of the artifact, it was included as part of the Museum’s exhibition called “Finding Meaning at Ground Zero.”
Workers at Ground Zero struggled to come to terms with the horrific circumstances in which they found themselves. Some sought to counter the sense of utter destruction by holding on to something recognizable, whether a metal bolt or shard of glass or a marble salvaged from the debris. Others, grappling with the absence of survivors and the regular recovery of human remains, found purpose by forging relationships with relatives of a particular victim, carrying a photograph or memorial card to bolster their resolve.
The American Atheists, Inc. alleged that the display of the cross, particularly without any accompanying plaque or similar item acknowledging that atheists were among those who lost their lives on September 11, 2001, or who participated in ensuing rescue efforts, violates the Constitution’s Establishment Clause.
The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York dismissed the lawsuit, and the Second Circuit affirmed. In reaching its decision, the appeals court highlighted that “the Supreme Court recently reiterated that caution when, in rejecting an Establishment Clause challenge to legislative prayer, it observed that the Constitution no more permits the mandating of ‘a civic religion that stifles any but the most generic reference to the sacred’ than it permits prescribing a religious orthodoxy.”
With regard to the Cross at Ground Zero, the Court held that “an objective observer would not view the display as endorsing religion generally, or Christianity specifically, because it is part of an exhibit entitled ‘Finding Meaning at Ground Zero;’ the exhibit includes various nonreligious as well as religious artifacts that people at Ground Zero used for solace; and the textual displays accompanying the cross communicate its historical significance within this larger context.” Finally, the court found that “there is no evidence that the static display of this genuine historic artifact excessively entangles the government with religion.”
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.

Utility-scale battery energy storage systems (BESS) are becoming an increasingly important component of the electric grid throughout New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania. As renewable generation expands, electricity demand increases and grid operators seek greater flexibility, battery storage can help balance supply and demand while providing additional capacity and reliability. For developers, battery storage presents […]
Author: Nicholas Wall

A falling out between partners can be disastrous for any business. In many cases, the partnership will not survive. If you are in an unworkable situation with your partners, it may be time to consult a partnership dispute lawyer experienced in handling partnership breakups and dissolutions before the situation deteriorates any further. It is easy […]
Author: Jay McDaniel

When a company enters Chapter 11 bankruptcy, many assume the process will culminate in a lengthy reorganization plan. However, distressed businesses are increasingly being sold through a different mechanism — a sale under Section 363 of the United States Bankruptcy Code. A Section 363 sale allows a company, as a debtor-in-possession in bankruptcy, to sell […]
Author: John D. Giampolo

Before buying property, it is critical to determine whether local zoning laws may affect your plans. If you plan to redevelop the property, you will want to confirm that local zoning regulations permit development as intended. If acquiring property that is already developed, you must verify that the use is permitted in the underlying zoning […]
Author: Wendy Rubinstein Quiroga

For parents of a child with a disability, estate planning raises concerns that go well beyond deciding who will inherit their assets. Parents may spend years making sure their child has the right care, services, and support. Eventually, they must also confront a difficult question: Who will take over when they can no longer do […]
Author: George McGowan

Before buying a New Jersey rental property, an investor should verify realistic operating numbers, the property’s legal and regulatory status, lead-based paint and flood compliance, the existing leases and tenant protections, and the right ownership structure. A rental property is more than a piece of real estate; it is an operating business subject to legal, […]
Author: Donald M. Pepe
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!