New Orleans can now remove confederate monuments. An appeal court has ruled on this. They can remove three confederate monuments that are in prominent locations. There has been a lawsuit filed by three different preservation societies. The US court of appeals rejected their claims though. The reasoning was that they lacked legal viability.
The city of New Orleans is not able to report how much it spent to remove four confederate statues. There have been several requests filed asking this information to the city, and private donors. While an exact price hasn’t been stated it is on public record that officers worked thousands…
The North Carolina Court of Appeals issued a significant ruling on Tuesday, favoring the Town of Louisburg in a lawsuit surrounding the removal of a Confederate monument. This decision marks a pivotal moment in the ongoing debate over Confederate symbols and monuments in the United States. Louisburg, a town located…
In New Orleans, an annual art event was interrupted when around 30 protesters blocked an intersection and used bullhorns to lead chants against white supremacy. The protest wasn’t of the event, but a call to remove several Confederate monuments from the city. The protest was soon broken up, but city…
In "News"
2 thoughts on “New Orleans can remove Confederate monuments, appeals court rules”
Ultimately, this is a local issue, and if monuments are to be protected, then those who want to ensure they stay where they are need to run for local office and sit on the city counsels and in the state assemblies that make these decisions. Electing protectors of our American history is important, and should be an objective of the organizations trying to keep them in place. Don’t just protest and file lawsuits. Pick people to run for local office.
I agree with this point on it being a local issue. Communities ultimately are responsible for their own environment, good or bad, and they must act to make it the way they want it to be. Group pressure is indispensable, and that includes selecting leaders that represent the group’s standards. On the other point, protest and civil legal action have a place in things, but only when less confrontational dialogue fails. It is a bad idea to elect one’s neighbors as enemies. That’s what criminals do, and we don’t like it. All this left/right, liberal/conservative conflict is nonsense. Communication that includes listening closely will solve just about anything.
Ultimately, this is a local issue, and if monuments are to be protected, then those who want to ensure they stay where they are need to run for local office and sit on the city counsels and in the state assemblies that make these decisions. Electing protectors of our American history is important, and should be an objective of the organizations trying to keep them in place. Don’t just protest and file lawsuits. Pick people to run for local office.
I agree with this point on it being a local issue. Communities ultimately are responsible for their own environment, good or bad, and they must act to make it the way they want it to be. Group pressure is indispensable, and that includes selecting leaders that represent the group’s standards. On the other point, protest and civil legal action have a place in things, but only when less confrontational dialogue fails. It is a bad idea to elect one’s neighbors as enemies. That’s what criminals do, and we don’t like it. All this left/right, liberal/conservative conflict is nonsense. Communication that includes listening closely will solve just about anything.