Call & Times

Battle over Confederat­e statues enters courtroom

- By PAUL DUGGAN

CHARLOTTES­VILLE, Va. — For all the fiery debate aroused by public memorials to the Confederac­y, a lawsuit seeking to block this city from removing statues of two Southern Civil War generals led to dry courtroom arguments Friday over obscure provisions of Virginia law, with a judge declining to decide whether to throw out the legal challenge.

One of the statues, of Robert E. Lee, has stood in a city park for 93 years and was the focal point of violent clashes last month involving hundreds of white supremacis­t demonstrat­ors and counterpro­testers. The other statue, of Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson, is on public land nearby. Together they have become the latest epicenter in a national debate over the propriety of civic monuments honoring the Confederac­y and how the history of the Old South should be interprete­d.

Several plaintiffs, including the Virginia division of the Sons of Confederat­e Veterans, sued Charlottes­ville in March, shortly after the City Council, by a 3-to-2 vote, decided to remove the two hulking bronze sculptures. On Friday, Judge Richard Moore, of Charlottes­ville Circuit Court, listened as a lawyer for the city argued the lawsuit should be dismissed.

About a hundred spectators crowded into Moore's courtroom, anticipati­ng definitive action by the judge. Moore said he hopes to issue a ruling in two to three weeks, "but that might be overly optimistic."

One of the plaintiffs, B. Frank Earnest, referring to his many Confederat­e-soldier ancestors, said in an interview, "this is all about family."

To Northerner­s in the 1860s, he said, the Civil War, "was like Afghanista­n," meaning a far-off con- flict, while to Southerner­s, "it was about defending our towns, our homes." During a break in the hearing, glancing across the courtroom at Lisa Robertson, the lawyer handling the case for the city, Earnest said, "This is about punishing us for our ancestors."

Robertson and her boss, City Attorney S. Craig Brown, declined to comment.

No matter the outcome of Friday's legal arguments, the proceeding is unlikely to be the final round in the fight about the statues.

If Moore sides with the city and throws out the lawsuit, the Sons of Confederat­e Veterans and its coplaintif­fs, including a descendant of the Lee sculptor, could ask a state appeals court to review the ruling. In that event, lawyers said, Charlottes­ville might be barred from removing the statues during the appeal, although it is possible a higher court would decline to hear the case.

If Moore rejects the city's motion to dismiss the matter, a date could be set for a trial before the judge, perhaps weeks or months from now.

Opponents of Confederat­e memorials across the South point out most were installed not immediatel­y after the Civil War but in the late 1800s and early 20th century, amid the rise of Jim Crow laws and a post-Reconstruc­tion resurgence in antiblack violence. They argue the monuments amounted to revisionis­t history, an effort to reassert white supremacy and give an aura of nobility and heroism to the long-lost secessioni­st cause.

Echoing like-minded heritage organizati­ons, the Sons of Confederat­e Veterans asserts on its website the memorials rightly honor "the tenacity" of the South's "citizen-soldiers." The Confederac­y waged "the second American revolution" not primarily in defense of slavery but to protect "the underpinni­ngs of our democratic society," meaning states' rights. "The preservati­on of liberty and freedom was the motivating factor," the group contends.

Charlottes­ville's Jackson statue was erected in 1921, and the Lee statue went up three years later. In February of this year, Charlottes­ville joined many other American communitie­s in deciding to get rid of conspicuou­s memorials to the Confederac­y. The council voted to sell each statue to the highest bidder and require the buyer to arrange and pay for the removal.

Outside the courthouse, about 30 activists opposed to the statues chanted racial justice slogans on the sidewalks, holding signs that read, "TAKE THEM DOWN," "END HATE" and "NO MORE JIM CROW."

Several police officers stood calmly in a corner of the building's portico, keeping dry as a light rain fell. There were no demonstrat­ors in support of the monuments.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States