I read in several papers today that U.S. District Judge William Downes
blocked a ban by the National Park Service against commercial-guided
climbing groups at Devils Tower National Monument in Wyoming.
According to the judge, this ban amounted to "unconstitutional
government support of religion" in violation of the First Amendment.
Many tribes consider this area sacred.
A couple of days ago, I downloaded the Executive Order signed by
President Bill Clinton regarding Indian Sacred Sites that says:
"Section 1. Accommodation of Sacred Sites. (a) In managing Federal
lands, each executive branch agency with statutory or administrative
responsibility for the management of Federal lands shall, to the extent
practicable, permitted by law, and not clearly inconsistent with essential
agency functions, (1) accommodate access to and ceremonial use of
Indian sacred sites by Indian religious practitioners and (2) avoid
adversely affecting the physical integrity of such sacred sites. Where
appropriate, agencies shall maintain the confidentiality of sacred sites."
Now I am confused. Can someone out there who understands and can
explain in layman's terms how a Federal judge can rule directly against a
Federal Executive Order? What is the relationship of an EO to the First
Amendment? Is my perception of this totally mixed up?
[ If anyone can answer any of these questions, please do so as a followup
to this article by using the "reply" function of your mail system or
that of your news system, if you're reading this article via Usenet or
via one of the APC member systems. --Gary (gst@gnosys.svle.ma.us) ]