Controversy Surrounding The Cross at Ground Zero

Mary Kate Fitzpatrick

Every September, America, as well as the rest of the world, is flooded with somber stories and memories of that fateful Tuesday. This past August, a unanimous court decision from the three-judge panel dismissed a challenge by atheists to display the cross-shaped beam at the National Sept. 11 Memorial and Museum at Ground Zero. In this particular case, American Atheists, Inc. v. Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, American Atheists began in 2011 to attempt to keep the 9/11 National Museum from displaying the cross-shaped beam, arguing that it violates the Establishment Clause of The First Amendment.

The cross-shaped beam at the center of this controversy is a 17ft steel column recovered in the rubble by construction workers in the wake of that devastating Tuesday. The structure quickly became a symbol of hope, and a place of worship for workers and everyone else affected that day. We are familiar with the controversial and the polarizing meaning of “separation of church and state”, but how does this differ in a public setting, and one that is so delicate?

According to the 2^nd U.S Circuit Court of Appeals that made the ruling, “the Establishment Clause is not properly construed to command that government accounts of history be devoid of religious references.” In simplest terms, this means that The First Amendment separates church from state, but does not and cannot separate religion from public life. These lines of difference at times seem a bit blurry, but in this instance the purpose of the display is to document the history of the terrorist attacks, and the rescue efforts that followed. The cross is on display in the “finding meaning” section of the museum along with over a thousand other artifacts used to help people make sense of the attack.

After a federal district court refused to block the inclusion of the cross, American Atheists agreed that the object was a historic artifact worthy of display, but argued that it would be unconstitutional to include it without including an acknowledgment that atheists were among the victims of 9/11. The court also rejected this demand, claiming that Government neutrality under the First amendment does not mean equal time or balanced treatment for all faiths and religions, it only requires the exhibit to represent the history of the event as it occurred, without promoting, or denigrating religion.

In this instance, in accordance to the First Amendment, and the Establishment Clause, the circuit courts made the correct ruling. While I find importance in the separation of church and state, I agree with the courts explanation that it cannot separate church from public life, as this would be a huge blow to the freedoms found in The First Amendment. In addition, I also agree with the courts rejection of including a separate doctrine that atheists were among the victims of 9/11. America is an incredibly diverse nation in which many nationalities, religions, and beliefs live side by side on a daily basis. It seems that it should be assumed that all of these differences are encompassed and included in the victims of 9/11 and those effected by it. America was attacked. In this, every American was attacked, not only religious people, or those living in New York. This case displays a great characteristic of America, in that we are allowed, and encouraged to question and fight against the government, even if it ends up being a loss.

 Sources:

http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/cross-at-ground-zero-history-lesson-or-state-religion

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/ground-zero-cross-remain-9-11-museum-court-article-1.1883174