Advertisement

The city of Charlottesville is still in the grips of a legal battle concerning the fate of the war memorial statues. Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring has argued that state law does not protect the monuments of Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson, but by actually reading the legislation it seems he's wrong.

The city of Charlottesville is still in the grips of a legal battle concerning the fate of the war memorial statues. Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring has argued that state law does not protect the monuments of Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson, but by actually reading the legislation it seems he’s wrong.

Although it has been supplanted by the hurricanes threatening the U.S., the Charlottesville controversy over the statue of United States Military veteran Robert E. Lee isn’t over.  Just because some Soros-funded thugs were bused in to create chaos doesn’t mean they win. The battle is still being waged in Virginia courts. Circuit Judge Richard Moore will decide the fate of this monument and one other within the next few weeks.

He heard arguments on Friday concerning the removal of a memorial to one of Virginia’s most decorated, courageous, and loyal men. And although ignorant leftists won’t understand this, the issue is actually one of law, not about feelings. Rewriting history because something is offensive is not only wrong, it’s dangerous.

Moore seems to understand that point. After hearing arguments from both sides last week, he did not issue a final ruling. He said that he needed time to examine the law concerning the “main issue.” Of course, that refers to whether the statue can remain or must be removed.

Advertisement

Robert E. Lee actually freed all of his slaves before the War Between the States. He was an honorable man. Perhaps that's why democrats today despise him so.

Robert E. Lee actually freed all of his slaves before the War Between the States. He was an honorable man. Perhaps that’s why democrats today despise him so.

On August 12, large groups of demonstrators appeared at the scene of a white nationalist rally that had a permit to assemble. The demonstrators did not have a permit. No sane person in America argues that free speech should be controlled or that just because someone has a different opinion they must be silent. The First Amendment doesn’t work that way.

However, that’s exactly what many antifa and other agitators believe. They claim that anyone who doesn’t adhere to their limited view is a “Nazi.” The mainstream leftist media has done much to support that belief. Out-of-state mobs appeared at the rally to “counterprotest” and then attacked.

The result is that Charlottesville has shrouded both the Robert E. Lee statue and another of Stonewall Jackson. A number of residents and groups say that Virginia law protects these monuments, and what the city is doing by trying to remove them, is illegal.

Advertisement

Today, the Charlottesville city council voted to remove the Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson monument too. It seems that democrat history of slavery is simply too much for them to bear, and now they're trying to distance themselves as the party of slavery.

Today, the Charlottesville city council voted to remove the Thomas “Stonewall” Jackson monument too. It seems that democrat history of slavery is simply too much for them to bear, and now they’re trying to distance themselves as the party of slavery.

Virginia state law is very clear:

“A locality may, within the geographical limits of the locality, authorize and permit the erection of monuments or memorials for any war or conflict, or for any engagement of such war or conflict, to include the following monuments or memorials…Confederate or Union monuments or memorials of the War Between the States (1861-1865)…. If such are erected, it shall be unlawful for the authorities of the locality, or any other person or persons, to disturb or interfere with any monuments or memorials so erected, or to prevent its citizens from taking proper measures and exercising proper means for the protection, preservation and care of same. For purposes of this section, “disturb or interfere with” includes removal of, damaging or defacing monuments or memorials, or, in the case of the War Between the States, the placement of Union markings or monuments on previously designated Confederate memorials or the placement of Confederate markings or monuments on previously designated Union memorials.” (emphasis added)

Deputy City attorney Lisa Robertson argued that the law, which was revised in the 1990’s doesn’t apply to statues already erected. However, the legislation also allows the governing body to apportion money to “protect and preserve such monuments or memorials.” This seems to indicate that the law was designed to apply to statues already placed.

Advertisement

Advocates of history maintain that “plain common sense” shows it applies to the Lee statue. Attorney Ralph Main said that the General Assembly wouldn’t have “discarded” protections for all the monuments in the state. “They didn’t pass this thinking, OK, next year we’re going to build some monument to the Revolutionary War,” Main said.

The city council voted to remove Jackson's statue today. Their recent behavior has been culpable to the activities that took place, and now they've ensured more division.

The city council voted to remove Jackson’s statue today. Their recent behavior has been culpable to the activities that took place, and now they’ve ensured more division.

Attorneys on both sides also disputed whether the claimants have the authority to bring the lawsuit. The city council had initially planned to leave the Jackson statue standing, but after the possibly contrived violence, they reneged on it today and voted to remove it. Fortunately, nothing will occur until the lawsuit has been settled.

The judge has made it clear that he won’t be swayed by public opinion. Because the most vocally vociferous are on the side of erasing history, Moore asked that these letters and communications to him stop. He said, “Judges do not wait to see what public opinion says.”

Hopefully, Judge Moore will decide the suit based on the merits of the law, not some activist feeling. He ignored the motion to dismiss brought by the city and said that his ruling will come after he’s had time to study.

The bottom line is that Virginia already has protections in place for these war monuments. These statues are dedicated to United State veterans by four specific acts of congress. Buckling under the threat of violence to a group of paid thugs is exactly what happened in 1930’s Germany and right thinking conservatives across the nation are fighting to keep that from happening here, and keep the truth in place.

Everyone should know the final fate of the Lee and Jackson’s monuments within the next few weeks. Of course, don’t expect that to be the end. If Moore rules for the law, liberals will most likely seek a higher court decision. Likewise, if Moore reject legislation, conservatives will look for justice too. Therefore, the controversy will continue.