A First Amendment expert in Laramie said the city of Casper would lose if its officials decide to fight in court to keep a controversial Ten Commandments monument in City Park.

"Ultimately, I suspect that the U.S. Supreme Court would probably find it unconstitutional as violative of the First Amendment command not to promote a particular religion," Tim Newcomb said in a telephone interview Wednesday. "You cannot put the Ten Commandments up without promoting a certain brand of Christianity."

After a public hearing on the issue Tuesday night, the Casper City Council voted 5-4 to table a motion to remove and relocate the Ten Commandments monument in City Park and ban any new monuments from city parks. Several residents urged the council to keep the monument, which has been challenged by the Freedom From Religion Foundation in Wisconsin.

The foundation asked the city to remove the monument from the southwest corner of 7th and Center streets, where it has rested since it was donated to the city in 1965 by the Fraternal Order of the Eagles. Having a religious monument on public property is a violation of the constitutionally mandated separation of church and state, the foundation claimed.

The matter was further complicated last week when the Rev. Fred Phelps of the anti-homosexual Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka, Kan., announced plans for a monument to be placed next to the Decalogue. Phelps' monument would be anti-homosexual in nature and would claim that slain gay University of Wyoming student Matthew Shepard is in hell, according to plans offered by the Westboro Baptist Church.

According to a ruling made by the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in the case Summan v. City of Ogden, a city that has a Ten Commandments monument on public property must also allow monuments espousing the beliefs of other political and religious groups.

If the city does not remove the monument or let Phelps put up his monument, both the Freedom From Religion Foundation and the Westboro Baptist Church have threatened litigation, City Manager Tom Forslund said.

Although the City Council has asked officials to investigate the possibility of selling a portion of City Park to a private party in order to keep the monument where it is, Newcomb was pessimistic that the chance such a move would be successful.

"If they sell it to that person so that they can keep it up, there are cases in which activity such as that has failed," Newcomb said.

However, Newcomb was optimistic about the city's chances if it decides to fight in court to keep Phelps' monument out of the park.

"I think there would be no problem keeping out a monument that was offensive. A person cannot force a government to put a monument up," he said. "My advice, if I were advising the council, would be 'See you in court.'"

Tabling the issue

The motion to get rid of the Decalogue at Tuesday's meeting was made by Councilwoman Renee Burgess and seconded by Councilman Guy Padgett. Councilwomen Jacquie Anderson and Lynne Whalen brought the motion to table the matter, with Council members Mildred Lamb, Paul Bertoglio and Ed Opella voting in agreement.

Councilwoman Barb Watters and Mayor Barb Peryam joined Burgess and Padgett in voting to keep the motion on the table.

But Lamb's vote to table the matter came after she said she would vote for the monument's removal. After the meeting, Lamb explained that she thought the city should further explore legal options to protect it against litigation from out-of-state groups that have threatened to sue over monuments in the city's parks.

Burgess was the only council member to raise the possibility of banning all future monuments from the city's parks. But in making her motion, which was tabled, the council could not address only the motion to remove and relocate the Ten Commandments monument.

"What they had was a motion that covered two different items. And they tabled it, so they had that item on the floor and it was tabled," Forslund explained Wednesday. "So to introduce another motion without disposing with the first one, one way or another, probably would be prohibited under Robert's Rules of Order."

"It's a parliamentarian issue, not a legal issue," Forslund added.

The council's vote to table Burgess' motion came at the end of a meeting that lasted nearly four hours and featured 55 members of the public commenting on the issue.

END STORY HERE FOR CITY RUN. USE FOLLOWING FOR FIRST AND SECOND RUNS

The public seemed every bit as divided on the matter of keeping the Ten Commandments in the park as the council was.

"We see the demons of sectarian violence," Mako Miller told the council. "Hence the church is the place to worship. … I urge you that on public property there should be no instrument to direct religious beliefs," she added.

Diane Brown, however, disagreed.

"Atheism is a religion and they are forcing their beliefs on us," said Brown. "By taking away my right to express my Christianity, the council would clearly be endorsing atheism," she added while urging the council to keep the Decalogue where it is.

Ryan Gish agreed with Brown and cited the historic Christian roots of America as reason to keep the monument in the park.

If the founding fathers were alive today, "they would be appalled to see what is happening to our country," Gish said. "The motto of our Revolutionary War was 'No king but King Jesus,'" he added.

Megan Simons cited the universality of the Ten Commandments as the reason why she thought it should stay where it is. "These are not the laws of Christianity, these are the laws of humanity," she said.

Brenton Harris, however, disagreed, saying that the having the monument in the park is a violation of American law.

"This is a cut-and-dry advocation of a religion," Harris said. "When we place a monument on public property, that means the government endorses what is written on the property. … It has to be removed."

Diane Dorsey agreed with Harris.

"I would ask the council to stand behind the law instead of the safe and cushy cloak of religion," she said.

After the meeting, Forslund was uncertain what action the city will next take on the matter.

He said the city's legal staff may look harder into selling the monument and other options may be examined as well.

The council likely will discuss the issue either at a work session or at another meeting sometime in the next four weeks, Forslund added.

Phelps will not be able to put up any monument in city park until the city makes a decision on the Ten Commandments and sets up a policy for placing other monuments in the park, Luben said.

If Phelps attempts to put up a monument in the park before a policy is established he will be doing so illegally and the city will remove any engraved stone he places in Casper, Forslund said.