i wrote the only annika's brief in that case, summum i thought that the boundary between public speech and not public speech in this context was much murkier than the court had it, and it's not clear that this is really the government speaking. is a hybrid category. of the cases have been cited in different ways. as to your larger point about the drafting committee, we did have several groups participate all throughout. and some groups have distinguished operation. bachus, my own organization, americans united adl, so it's not as if those points of view were not -- my recollection is they participate to large parts of the drafting process. >> yes. and if you look at the list of the signers, you can see there is a jeremy who was foreman with the aco you, judy shafer, -- >> i members of those organizations. i think you might get different results. >> my point is i think you might get a different result if you accepted nonbelief groups like the american human association. like freedom from religion foundation, like american 80s. thank you. >> if what you're doing is actually stating the l

my understanding is that the case was about summum trying to put it's monument into the pioneer park in pleasant glove city. the court held the first part that the government can choose which monuments it wants. but it did not settle the issue with respect to the order of the ten commandments. it left that for a latter day.yr poison. you have either a free speech problem here or you have an establishment class problem. so i wish perhaps you could address that issue. >> well, the answer is true. they haven't yet addressed. and whether or not it's properly comes before the court. because certainly that case there was not ringing of the reference. by reference to the unanimous decision is to make clear that governments are allowed to expect private and permanent monument for placement in public display. in this particular context, it was the ten commandments. it stands to this day in the utah. and i think that's actually the kind of right decision. because it goes to limit down at least in the public quorum area what it is government can do. can government get it's own as when it walk b