Salazar v. Buono: The Perils of Piecemeal Adjudication

Northwestern University Law Review Colloquy, Vol. 105, p. 72, 2010

13 Pages Posted: 7 Nov 2010

See all articles by Lisa Shaw Roy

Lisa Shaw Roy

University of Mississippi School of Law

Date Written: September 2010

Abstract

The recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in Salazar v. Buono, a case involving a Latin cross placed on federal land in the Mojave Desert by the Veterans of Foreign Wars, fails to squarely address what many would assume to be the central issue in the case. Due to a procedural glitch in the history of the case, Salazar does not decide the merits of whether the Mojave Desert cross, sitting atop Sunrise Peak in a federal park preserve, violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. Nonetheless, several of the opinions in Salazar address the issue of whether the land transfer statute enacted to preserve the cross violates the district court’s injunction against display of the cross on federal land. Those opinions occasionally pierce through to the merits of the Establishment Clause issue and provide some insight into the possible direction of the Court’s future monuments and symbols cases. In this essay I argue that Salazar suggests a move toward accommodation in the Court’s Establishment Clause doctrine, although Salazar does little to elucidate the concept of accommodation.

Suggested Citation

Roy, Lisa Shaw, Salazar v. Buono: The Perils of Piecemeal Adjudication (September 2010). Northwestern University Law Review Colloquy, Vol. 105, p. 72, 2010. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1695548

Lisa Shaw Roy (Contact Author)

University of Mississippi School of Law ( email )

Lamar Law Center
P.O. Box 1848
University, MS 38677
United States
(662) 915-6813 (Phone)

Here is the Coronavirus
related research on SSRN

Paper statistics

Downloads
26
Abstract Views
398
PlumX Metrics