Dead Confederates, A Civil War Era Blog

I’m not an attorney, but this has to be the most ranty, spittle-flecked screed I’ve ever seen come from a member of the bar:

ONGOING HORROR – Earlier this Week, Lexington Kentucky, now Caddo Parish, LA Monument! Are you mad yet?

These monuments are protected by the FIRST AMENDMENT. The political whores who make these decisions , constitutionally should have NO say in the matter of monuments that constitute public art – because these decision makers ARE government & because their predecessors accepted these monuments in trust & in perpetuity on behalf of the PEOPLE they were elected to serve. Elected officials blow into office and blow out – they have no right or power to get rid of the “peoples’ artwork” even if they use “private money to pay for it!”

This legal doctrine (developed in our Texas federal court cases in San Antonio, Dallas & UT Austin) is an exception to the so -called “government speech”doctrine announced by the US Supreme Court 2 years ago in the SCV license plate case.

Of course our 3rd world cities love Govt speech – Government Speech Ueber Alles!! they cry – it trumps everything and allows the sneak thiefs to pull down monuments in the dead of night! In Kentucky the Mayor of Lexington’s buddy the Atty General writes a BS opinion saying the monuments can come down – the State Agency charged with oversight stands down & refuses to intervene- even though the monuments are at least partially STATE property. Treason & collusion!

SLRC has a workable legal doctrine that NEEDS to be the law of the land – it can step in in states where there is weak or non existent Monument protection laws. It can be used to challenge the legality of monument desecrations already perpetrated.

He goes on to list some of the things he needs in his struggle — cash being at the top of the list, of course — immediately followed by “legal eggheads to write law review articles.” That’s real collegial and professional, counselor.

There’s lots more foolishness in the post, that you can reflect on at your leisure. As long-time readers know, Lyons has a history of making grandiose claims about his legal acumen and his ability to overturn the tyrannical rule of the Yankee courts, if only people would send him money. As far as I can tell, his actual record of success in litigating heritage cases is, to be diplomatic, limited. In the Dallas case he mentions, he managed to secure an emergency stay for the federal court to block the removal of the Robert E. Lee monument there, that only halted the work until the parties could make oral arguments before the bench. The stay was lifted the following day — less than 24 hours after being imposed, as I recall — and the monument was removed soon afterwards. How Lyons’ filing in that case is supposed to serve as a model for the vindication of Confederate monuments all the way up through the Supreme Court is really beyond my legal ken.

Certainly people are free to send Lyons and his organization money if they want to, but it’s hard to imagine that many people would read that appeal, and look at Lyons’ record, and go looking for their checkbook.

_____