WASHINGTON (ABP) — In a groundbreaking, but limited, free-speech case the Supreme Court said the city of Pleasant Grove, Utah, can’t be forced to accept the gift of a monument to a small religious sect’s precepts — even though the town already displays a donated monument to the Ten Commandments in its city-owned Pioneer Park.
But in Pleasant Grove City v. Summum, the opinion of a unanimous court also made clear the decision turned on whether the Decalogue monument was government speech or private speech — not on the religious content of the speech itself. That means the existing monument could still be open to a challenge under the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause, which bans government endorsement of religion.
“The parties’ fundamental disagreement thus centers on the nature of petitioners’ conduct when they permitted privately donated monuments to be erected in Pioneer Park. Were [city officials] engaging in their own expressive conduct? Or were they providing a forum for private speech?” wrote Justice Samuel Alito, who authored the court’s opinion.
Leaders of the sect, called Summum and based in nearby Salt Lake City, asked Pleasant Grove officials in 2003 to display the monument to the “Seven Aphorisms of Summum,” which the 33-year-old group says were also handed to Moses on Mount Sinai along with the Decalogue. The Aphorisms include such sayings as: “Everything flows out and in; everything has its season; all things rise and fall; the pendulum swing expresses itself in everything; the measure of the swing to the right is the measure of the swing to the left; rhythm compensates.”
The courts have long established that government entities providing public forums for private speech — such as speakers’ corners in city parks — cannot discriminate in what sorts of speech are allowed. But Alito said the Ten Commandments monument and other privately donated displays in the park have effectively become government speech, and therefore, the city can refuse to endorse some messages.
“The Free Speech Clause restricts government regulation of private speech; it does not regulate government speech,” Alito wrote. “… Permanent monuments displayed on public property typically represent government speech.”