{"id":217022,"date":"2019-07-18T15:00:37","date_gmt":"2019-07-18T09:30:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=217022"},"modified":"2019-07-18T13:19:44","modified_gmt":"2019-07-18T07:49:44","slug":"us-sc-bladensburg-cross-world-war-i-memorial-does-not-violate-establishment-clause-of-the-us-constitution-not-a-religious-symbol-but-a-historical-landmark","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/07\/18\/us-sc-bladensburg-cross-world-war-i-memorial-does-not-violate-establishment-clause-of-the-us-constitution-not-a-religious-symbol-but-a-historical-landmark\/","title":{"rendered":"US SC | Bladensburg Cross: World War-I Memorial does not violate \u2018Establishment Clause\u2019 of the US Constitution \u2013 not a religious symbol but a historical landmark"},"content":{"rendered":"

Supreme Court of the United States of America: <\/strong>The Full Court of John J. Roberts, CJ. and Samuel A. Alito, Stephen G. Breyer, Brett Michael Kavanaugh, Elena Kagan, Clarence Thomas, Neil McGill Gorsuch, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Maria Sotomayor, JJ. upheld the constitutionality of Bladensburg Cross holding that the memorial was not an endorsement of Christianity.<\/p>\n

The present case pertained to the constitutionality of a memorial built on public land in Maryland to honor fallen soldiers in World War-I, which was in the form of a 40-foot cross known as Blandensberg Peace Cross. In 2014, the American Humanist Association (AHA) lodged a complaint in District Court of Maryland alleging that the Cross\u2019 presence on public land and maintenance of the memorial violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the US Constitution which stated that \u201cCongress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion\u201d<\/em>. AHA sought declaratory and injunctive relief claiming removal or demolition of the Cross, or removal of the arms from the Cross so that it forms non-religious slab. The American Legion intervened to defend the Cross and pleaded that the Cross\u2019s history, setting, and secular elements did not impermissibly endorse religion.<\/p>\n

The District Court held that the existence of Cross satisfied the Lemon Test[1]<\/a>. Applying the test the Court determined that the Commission had the secular purpose of acquiring and maintaining the Cross, to commemorate World War I and to ensure traffic safety and concluded that the Cross was constitutional. However, the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reversed the said judgment opining that although the monument had several secular elements they were overshadowed by the Cross\u2019 size and its Christian connection. It was held that the Cross failed Lemon\u2019s Test as Commission excessively got entangled with religion by spending excessive public funds to maintain it; and a reasonable observer would view the Commission’s ownership and maintenance of the monument as an endorsement of Christianity. Thus, the present appeal.<\/p>\n

The Supreme Court, by a majority of 7:2 held that the meaning of the Cross was not limited only to its historical context and that the 94-year-old cross was a \u2018historical landmark\u2019 destruction of which would be disrespectful. It was opined that though the Cross was \u201cundoubtedly a Christian symbol\u201d<\/em>, but the monument had come to represent \u201ca symbolic resting place for ancestors who never returned home, a place for the community to gather and honour all veterans and their sacrifices for this Nation, and a historical landmark\u201d<\/em>.<\/p>\n

It was observed that even if the original purpose of a monument be infused with religion, passage of time may obscure that sentiment; and as the society becomes more and more religiously diverse, a community may preserve such monuments, symbols, and practices for the sake of their historical significance or their place in a common cultural heritage. The Court gave the example of the Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris and observed that \u201cwith sufficient time, religiously expressive monuments, symbols, and practices can become embedded features of a community\u2019s landscape and identity.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

In view of the above, it was held that destroying the Bladensburg Cross \u201cwould not be neutral and would not further the ideals of respect and tolerance embodied in the First Amendment\u201d.<\/em>[American Legion v. American Humanist Association, 588 US 2019<\/em>, decided on 20-06-2019]<\/p>\n

\n

[1]<\/a> Lemon test was enunciated in the case of Alton J. Lemon v. David H. Kurtzman<\/em>. Under the said test, while determining if a particular law violates the 1st<\/sup> Amendment of the US Constitution, a Court must-see if: (i) the statute has a secular purpose; (ii) the \u2018principal or primary effect\u2019 of the statute must be one that \u2018neither advances nor inhibits religion\u2019; and (iii) the statute does not foster \u2018excessive government entanglement with religion\u2019.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Supreme Court of the United States of America: The Full Court of John J. Roberts, CJ. and Samuel A. Alito, Stephen G. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":32691,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,12],"tags":[36680,36677,36679,36675,36678,36676],"class_list":["post-217022","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-foreigncourts","tag-bladensburg-cross","tag-establishment-clause","tag-hostorical-landmark","tag-lemon-test","tag-rehious-symbol","tag-world-war-i-memorial"],"yoast_head":"\nUS SC | Bladensburg Cross: World War-I Memorial does not violate \u2018Establishment Clause\u2019 of the US Constitution \u2013 not a religious symbol but a historical landmark | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/07\/18\/us-sc-bladensburg-cross-world-war-i-memorial-does-not-violate-establishment-clause-of-the-us-constitution-not-a-religious-symbol-but-a-historical-landmark\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"US SC | Bladensburg Cross: World War-I Memorial does not violate \u2018Establishment Clause\u2019 of the US Constitution \u2013 not a religious symbol but a historical landmark\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Supreme Court of the United States of America: The Full Court of John J. Roberts, CJ. and Samuel A. Alito, Stephen G.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/07\/18\/us-sc-bladensburg-cross-world-war-i-memorial-does-not-violate-establishment-clause-of-the-us-constitution-not-a-religious-symbol-but-a-historical-landmark\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2019-07-18T09:30:37+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/07\/18\/us-sc-bladensburg-cross-world-war-i-memorial-does-not-violate-establishment-clause-of-the-us-constitution-not-a-religious-symbol-but-a-historical-landmark\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/07\/18\/us-sc-bladensburg-cross-world-war-i-memorial-does-not-violate-establishment-clause-of-the-us-constitution-not-a-religious-symbol-but-a-historical-landmark\/\",\"name\":\"US SC | Bladensburg Cross: World War-I Memorial does not violate \u2018Establishment Clause\u2019 of the US Constitution \u2013 not a religious symbol but a historical landmark | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/07\/18\/us-sc-bladensburg-cross-world-war-i-memorial-does-not-violate-establishment-clause-of-the-us-constitution-not-a-religious-symbol-but-a-historical-landmark\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/07\/18\/us-sc-bladensburg-cross-world-war-i-memorial-does-not-violate-establishment-clause-of-the-us-constitution-not-a-religious-symbol-but-a-historical-landmark\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2019-07-18T09:30:37+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/07\/18\/us-sc-bladensburg-cross-world-war-i-memorial-does-not-violate-establishment-clause-of-the-us-constitution-not-a-religious-symbol-but-a-historical-landmark\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/07\/18\/us-sc-bladensburg-cross-world-war-i-memorial-does-not-violate-establishment-clause-of-the-us-constitution-not-a-religious-symbol-but-a-historical-landmark\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/07\/18\/us-sc-bladensburg-cross-world-war-i-memorial-does-not-violate-establishment-clause-of-the-us-constitution-not-a-religious-symbol-but-a-historical-landmark\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg\",\"width\":1330,\"height\":887,\"caption\":\"Supreme Court of The United States\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/07\/18\/us-sc-bladensburg-cross-world-war-i-memorial-does-not-violate-establishment-clause-of-the-us-constitution-not-a-religious-symbol-but-a-historical-landmark\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"US SC | Bladensburg Cross: World War-I Memorial does not violate \u2018Establishment Clause\u2019 of the US Constitution \u2013 not a religious symbol but a historical landmark\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\",\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Bhumika Indulia\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"US SC | Bladensburg Cross: World War-I Memorial does not violate \u2018Establishment Clause\u2019 of the US Constitution \u2013 not a religious symbol but a historical landmark | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/07\/18\/us-sc-bladensburg-cross-world-war-i-memorial-does-not-violate-establishment-clause-of-the-us-constitution-not-a-religious-symbol-but-a-historical-landmark\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"US SC | Bladensburg Cross: World War-I Memorial does not violate \u2018Establishment Clause\u2019 of the US Constitution \u2013 not a religious symbol but a historical landmark","og_description":"Supreme Court of the United States of America: The Full Court of John J. Roberts, CJ. and Samuel A. Alito, Stephen G.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/07\/18\/us-sc-bladensburg-cross-world-war-i-memorial-does-not-violate-establishment-clause-of-the-us-constitution-not-a-religious-symbol-but-a-historical-landmark\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2019-07-18T09:30:37+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/07\/18\/us-sc-bladensburg-cross-world-war-i-memorial-does-not-violate-establishment-clause-of-the-us-constitution-not-a-religious-symbol-but-a-historical-landmark\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/07\/18\/us-sc-bladensburg-cross-world-war-i-memorial-does-not-violate-establishment-clause-of-the-us-constitution-not-a-religious-symbol-but-a-historical-landmark\/","name":"US SC | Bladensburg Cross: World War-I Memorial does not violate \u2018Establishment Clause\u2019 of the US Constitution \u2013 not a religious symbol but a historical landmark | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/07\/18\/us-sc-bladensburg-cross-world-war-i-memorial-does-not-violate-establishment-clause-of-the-us-constitution-not-a-religious-symbol-but-a-historical-landmark\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/07\/18\/us-sc-bladensburg-cross-world-war-i-memorial-does-not-violate-establishment-clause-of-the-us-constitution-not-a-religious-symbol-but-a-historical-landmark\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg","datePublished":"2019-07-18T09:30:37+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/07\/18\/us-sc-bladensburg-cross-world-war-i-memorial-does-not-violate-establishment-clause-of-the-us-constitution-not-a-religious-symbol-but-a-historical-landmark\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/07\/18\/us-sc-bladensburg-cross-world-war-i-memorial-does-not-violate-establishment-clause-of-the-us-constitution-not-a-religious-symbol-but-a-historical-landmark\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/07\/18\/us-sc-bladensburg-cross-world-war-i-memorial-does-not-violate-establishment-clause-of-the-us-constitution-not-a-religious-symbol-but-a-historical-landmark\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg","width":1330,"height":887,"caption":"Supreme Court of The United States"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/07\/18\/us-sc-bladensburg-cross-world-war-i-memorial-does-not-violate-establishment-clause-of-the-us-constitution-not-a-religious-symbol-but-a-historical-landmark\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"US SC | Bladensburg Cross: World War-I Memorial does not violate \u2018Establishment Clause\u2019 of the US Constitution \u2013 not a religious symbol but a historical landmark"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a","name":"Bhumika Indulia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","caption":"Bhumika Indulia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":235573,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/09\/09\/sls-noida-wins-best-memorial-defence-award-in-the-asia-pacific-rounds-of-the-18th-red-cross-international-humanitarian-law-moot\/","url_meta":{"origin":217022,"position":0},"title":"SLS Noida wins best Memorial-Defence award in the Asia-Pacific rounds of the 18th Red Cross International Humanitarian Law Moot","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"September 9, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Reported by Aurin Chakraborty","rel":"","context":"In "Law School News"","block_context":{"text":"Law School News","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/lawschoolnews\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/09\/IMG-20200907-WA0050.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/09\/IMG-20200907-WA0050.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/09\/IMG-20200907-WA0050.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/09\/IMG-20200907-WA0050.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/09\/IMG-20200907-WA0050.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":205953,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/11\/29\/homophobia-a-poor-law-of-the-victorian-era-cross-dressing-an-expression-of-identity-reiterating-fundamental-right-caribbean-court-of-justice\/","url_meta":{"origin":217022,"position":1},"title":"Homophobia a \u2018Poor Law\u2019 of the Victorian era; Cross-dressing an expression of identity reiterating fundamental right: CCJ","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"November 29, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ): A Five Judge Bench comprising of Saunders (President) and Wit, Barrow, Anderson, Rajnauth-Lee, JJ. allowed an appeal by directing the judicial officers to refrain from using the bench to proselytize or express any stereotypical opinion. The appellants were transgenders who were arrested and detained for\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/07\/CCJ.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/07\/CCJ.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/07\/CCJ.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/07\/CCJ.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/07\/CCJ.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":369818,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/12\/15\/madras-hc-communitys-right-to-erect-natham-kanavai-war-memorial-stupa-on-private-land-scc-times\/","url_meta":{"origin":217022,"position":2},"title":"No permission required to erect Natham Kanavai War Memorial Stupa on private land: Madras High Court","author":"Ritu","date":"December 15, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cArticle 51A of the Constitution of India mandates that it shall be the duty of every citizen of India to cherish and follow the noble ideals which inspired our national struggle for freedom and to defend the country and render national service when called upon to do so.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Natham Kanavai War Memorial","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/Natham-Kanavai-War-Memorial.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/Natham-Kanavai-War-Memorial.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/Natham-Kanavai-War-Memorial.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/Natham-Kanavai-War-Memorial.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":348369,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/20\/punjab-and-haryana-hc-rejects-pil-seeking-declaration-pahalgam-attack-victims-as-martyrs-shaheed\/","url_meta":{"origin":217022,"position":3},"title":"Punjab and Haryana HC rejects PIL seeking declaration of Pahalgam terror attack victims as martyrs","author":"Editor","date":"May 20, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"The Court held that the issue of declaration of a particular place as a Memorial, or naming it differently, or the declaration of deceased persons as Martyr\/ Shaheed was within the exclusive domain of policy decision of the State.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Punjab and Haryana High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Punjab-and-Haryana-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Punjab-and-Haryana-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Punjab-and-Haryana-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Punjab-and-Haryana-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":223315,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/12\/16\/sls-noida-wins-regional-rounds-of-15th-henry-dunant-memorial-moot-court-competition-2019\/","url_meta":{"origin":217022,"position":4},"title":"SLS-NOIDA wins Regional Rounds of 15th Henry Dunant Memorial Moot Court Competition, 2019","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"December 16, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Reported by Ananya Gangwar","rel":"","context":"In "Law School News"","block_context":{"text":"Law School News","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/lawschoolnews\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/12\/image.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/12\/image.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/12\/image.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/12\/image.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":317998,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/21\/tata-memorial-hospital-classified-autonomous-body-central-government-control-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":217022,"position":5},"title":"Bombay High Court| Tata Memorial Hospital classified as an autonomous body under Central Government Control","author":"Arunima","date":"March 21, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Tata Memorial Hospital and Indian Cancer Research Centre were amalgamated into an institution named as Tata Memorial Centre, which was registered as a Society under the provisions of the Societies Registration Act, 1860 and also as a public trust under the provisions of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Bombay High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/217022","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8808"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=217022"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/217022\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/32691"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=217022"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=217022"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=217022"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}