Salazar v. Buono
Issues
Whether Buono has standing and, if he does, whether the sale of land in question from the Department of the Interior to the Veterans of Foreign Wars overcomes the Establishment Clause violation?
Salazar v. Buono concerns the Establishment Clause and a Latin cross on federal land. In 1934, the Veterans of Foreign Wars(“VFW”) erected a large Latin cross on Sunrise Rock in San Bernardino, California, commemorating veterans of World War I. In 2004, ten years after Sunrise Rock became federal parkland, Frank Buono sued the Secretary of the Interior. Buono argued that the cross’ presence on federal land violated the Establishment Clause. Buono won. While the case was on appeal, Congress attempted to transfer the land to the VFW. After the Court of Appeals affirmed Buono’s victory, Buono moved to enforce the judgment. The District Court then blocked the land transfer and ordered the removal of the cross. The Court of Appeals affirmed that enforcement action. The Supreme Court granted certiorari to resolve whether Buono had standing to challenge the cross’ presence in the first place, and if he did, whether transfer to a private party corrects the Establishment Clause violation. This case may have implications for standing doctrine in religious injury cases. Furthermore, this case may provide guidance on the use of land transfer as a means to resolve Establishment Clause violations.
Questions as Framed for the Court by the Parties
More than 70 years ago, the Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) erected a cross as a memorial to fallen service members in a remote area within what is now a federal preserve. After the district court held that the presence of the cross on federal land violated the Establishment Clause and the court permanently enjoined the government from permitting the display of the cross, Congress enacted legislation directing the Department of the Interior to transfer an acre of land including the cross to the VFW in exchange for a parcel of equal value. The district court then permanently enjoined the government from implementing that Act of Congress, and the court of appeals affirmed. The questions presented are:
- Whether respondent has standing to maintain this action where he has no objection to the public display of a cross, but instead is offended that the public land on which the cross is located is not also an open forum on which other persons might display other symbols.
- Whether, even assuming respondent has standing, the court of appeals erred in refusing to give effect to the Act of Congress providing for the transfer of the land to private hands.
The Mojave National Preserve and the Cross
In 1934, the Veterans of Foreign Wars (“VFW”) erected a Latin cross atop Sunrise Rock on the north side of Cima Road in southeastern California. See Buono v. Norton, 212 F.Supp.2d 1202, 1205 (C.D. Cal.
Written by
Edited by
Additional Resources
· Annotated U.S. Constitution: First Amendment (Religion and Expression)
· Wex: Law about First Amendment (Establishment Clause)
· PrawfsBlawg: Salazar v. Buono (Feb. 24, 2009)