It bothers me when I see attorneys attempt to hide intolerance under the cloak legal authority. It’s nothing new. We have a long history of the courts being used to achieve discriminatory objectives. The latest attempt is a legally misplaced opinion piece by columnist/attorney Peter Ferrara who claims that the government can constitutionally regulate the location of the Ground Zero Mosque using time, place and manner restrictions. He writes:
If the authorities believe a particular location would be offensive to some segment of the public, the time, place and manner doctrine gives them the power to prevent construction of a church, or a mosque, at the offensive location.
It is true that Court has held that the 1st Amendment’s Free-Exercise Clause, the right of citizens for free exercise of their religion, is not absolute. A citizen’s free-exercise right must be weighed against the public interest and a state can regulate to ensure that it is practiced in a reasonable time, place, and manner.
What Ferrara does not tell you is that in the case of religion, these types of restrictions are looked upon skeptically and rarely upheld by the courts.
What Ferrara is really endorsing and calling it something else is content based, viewpoint discrimination. That viewpoint is the practice of Islam. For those unfamiliar, for a law to be content based, it discriminates based on the content of the message AS OPPOSED to the, time, place and manner in which the message is made, or the reactions it incites in people. These types of laws are presumptively unconstitutional. What Ferrara is really saying is that the Ground Zero Mosque should not be built because he finds Islam offensive. Regardless of the validity of his viewpoint on that subject or anyone else’s view, this is content based. It fits into no legal exception for regulation and is unconstitutional.
Comments
Powered by Facebook Comments
August 6th, 2010 at 4:57 pm
Brian,
I have a couple of questions? Who owned the property where the Mosque is to be built, prior to the 9/11 terrorist attacks? Was the properties bought legally? Does the proposed Mosque and monument meet city coding ordinances?
If the properties were purchased legally and the plans for the building meets all ordinance requirements then, they should be allowed( and encouraged) to become part of the NYC community.
August 6th, 2010 at 5:40 pm
Why is ok for them to build the Mosque in that location but we are denied to pray outright in school? They call it a moment of silence for some time it was to have respect for people in 911, now the kids have had that drilled in their head they have no idea of prayer concept for whatever their faith is. Most kids don't even want to acknowledge that moment of silence. I guess to the world people I find it in-congruent.
August 6th, 2010 at 6:01 pm
i guarantee you if their was a christian church being built at ground zero the ACLU would stop it
August 6th, 2010 at 6:11 pm
I have read that there are no zoning issues, cant comment on the other
August 6th, 2010 at 6:11 pm
on what basis?
August 10th, 2010 at 4:18 pm
Why is this considered a freedom of religion issue as opposed to a property rights issue? Is anyone trying to deny anyone the right to practice their religion? Is anyone trying to deny anyone the right to build a mosque? It seems that New Yorkers (and others) are only trying to preserve that particular area of the city.
August 10th, 2010 at 4:18 pm
Yep they sure would ..it seems that every thing is represented and sanctifiable but Christianity .. a shame
August 11th, 2010 at 5:14 pm
Lets make this real clear Brian about your Mosque at Ground Zero that you think is feasible Not all Islams are terrorists but every terrorist has been Islam. Bottom line when a van full of Taliban pulls up it will be unsettling….
September 6th, 2010 at 6:52 am
Agreed to all the freedom of rights issue on everything but what about protecting the sensibilities of those families who were affected. Isn't it simply just a matter of how much more traumatized they will be. Is it so wrong to think about not hurting them anymore.