Pleasant Grove City v. Summum

Infobox SCOTUS case
Litigants=Pleasant Grove City v. Summum
ArgueDate=November 12
ArgueYear=2008
DecideDate=
DecideYear=
FullName=Pleasant Grove City, Utah, et al. v. Summum
Docket=07-665
USVol=
USPage=
CitationNew=
Prior=
Subsequent=
QuestionsPresented=Whether Pleasant Grove City, Utah, that allows a privately donated Ten Commandments monument to be displayed on public property must let another religion put up its own statue of similar size.
Holding=
SCOTUS=2006-2008
Majority=
JoinMajority=
Concurrence=
JoinConcurrence=
Concurrence2=
JoinConcurrence2=
Concurrence/Dissent=
JoinConcurrence/Dissent=
Dissent=
JoinDissent=
Dissent2=
JoinDissent2=
LawsApplied=

"Pleasant Grove City v. Summum" is an ongoing legal case in which the United States Supreme Court has to decide whether the municipality of Pleasant Grove, Utah that allows a privately donated Ten Commandments monument to be displayed on public property must let another religion put up its own statue of similar size. The court is expected to rule that the United States Constitution does not allow government to favor one religion over another. [cite news |first= |last= |authorlink= |coauthors= |title=The Supreme Court’s New Term |url=http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/06/opinion/06mon1.html |work=New York Times |publisher= |date=2008-10-06 |accessdate= ]

ee also

*Summum
*"Van Orden v. Perry" (2005)
*"McCreary County v. ACLU of Kentucky" (2005)

References

Further reading

*cite news |first=David G. |last=Savage |authorlink= |coauthors= |title=Display one creed, permit all? Must a city park that displays one monument also permit others’? |url=http://articles.latimes.com/2008/apr/01/nation/na-monuments1 |work=Los Angeles Times |publisher= |date=2008-04-01 |accessdate=