Crèche Case Suffers Setback

Crèche Case Suffers Setback

Atty. Darling Confident as He Prepares Appeal

By Ed Oliver
August 9, 2001

A magistrate in Boston’s U.S. District Court last month upheld the town of Lexington’s ban of the manger scene that has been an annual Christmas tradition on the Battle Green for almost a century.

Magistrate Judith Gail Dein issued the decision in the form of a report and recommendation to vacationing Judge Nancy Gertner, who is assigned to the case.

Gertner is expected to follow Judge Dein’s recommendation when she issues her ruling.

Courtroom observers say this is only the beginning and the case may ultimately be decided at the U.S. Supreme Court level.

Dein heard oral arguments last month in the case, which is Knights of Columbus v. Town of Lexington.

The Knights, represented by civil rights attorney Chester Darling, argued that banning the crèche was an unconstitutional violation of their rights of free speech and free exercise of religion.

The town of Lexington, represented by the law firm of Palmer and Dodge argued that the regulations governing the Battle Green are content neutral and reasonable restrictions on time, place, and manner of speech.

In her decision, Judge Dein wrote, “There is no question in the present case that opposition to the crèche motivated the amendment to the regulations. However, there is still no evidence of an attempt to suppress the ‘message of the crèche,’ or that the ‘message of the crèche’ was treated differently than any other message which may have been deemed less controversial. There were no special or different burdens imposed on the plaintiff’s request for a permit to display the crèche: other permit requests had to meet the same criteria.”

Attorney Darling told MassNews that he will file an objection and then wait on Judge Gertner’s decision. If Gertner endorses Dein’s decision, he will appeal to the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

See August 2001 issue. Search word for internet archives: “dein.”

Related story:
Lexington Crèche Is ‘Targeted’ for Banishment, Court is Told