A North Carolina appeals court has ruled in a case involving a Confederate monument standing outside a central North Carolina courthouse.

A North Carolina appeals court ruled Tuesday that local leaders who refused calls to remove a Confederate monument from outside a county courthouse acted in a constitutional manner and kept in place the statue at its longtime location in accordance with state law.

The three-judge panel unanimously upheld a trial court judge’s decision to side with Alamance County and its commissioners over the 30 foot (9.1 meter)-tall statue, which features a Confederate infantryman perched at the top. The state NAACP, the Alamance NAACP chapter, and other groups and individuals had sued the county and its leaders in 2021 after the commissioners rejected calls to take the statue down.

Confederate monuments in North Carolina, as elsewhere nationwide, were a frequent focal point for racial inequality protests in the late 2010s, and particularly in 2020 following the murder of George Floyd by a Minneapolis police officer. North Carolina legislators enacted a law in 2015 that limits when an “object of remembrance” such as a military monument can be relocated.

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    25·
    3 months ago

    Imagine if Germany allowed Hitler monuments… or worse, as in Atlanta, carved portraits of the Nazi leadership into the side of a mountain…

      • Ranvier@sopuli.xyz
        5·
        3 months ago

        Stone mountain is Georgia state property:

        https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stone_Mountain

        They just hired a management company to help run it.

        The state government of Georgia had everything to do with its creation. It was purchased by the state of Georgia in 1958, and the state explicitly authorized finishing the carving through the stone mountain memorial association act, passed in the same year, using public funds to help finance it. The carving wasn’t complete until 1970.

        Georgia had to honor the birthplace of the kkk during the height of the Civil rights movement of course. It’s not a subtle message.

        https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/what-will-happen-stone-mountain-americas-largest-confederate-memorial-180964588/

        The German government building monuments to nazis analogy is apt.

          • Ranvier@sopuli.xyz
            3·
            3 months ago

            It was originally private property which might have been the confusion, though even back in the 1920’s in the Jim crow era when it was first started there was government involvement with helping to fund it. It languished for decades unfinished though, until Brown V Board of Education and the birth of the civil rights movement renewed interest again in erecting more confederate statues. The segregationist governor Marvin Griffin began pushing for the state to buy the property and finish the carving.

            The main pillar of his platform was a promise to fight integration, a concept he called “an order to us from Washington [to] mongrelize the South.” Griffin also vowed, often in the same breath, to buy Stone Mountain for the state and finally complete the carving. He won the election.

            https://www.ajc.com/news/atlanta-news/what-telling-the-truth-about-stone-mountain-might-look-like/732I32LU4RFL5M5MNO75WEC774/

            The more you dig into confederate monuments the more you realize most of them have very little to do with being actual war memorials and a lot to do with the politics of white supremacy.

    • Forester@yiffit.net
      4·
      3 months ago

      From my understanding this is a monument to represent the common soldier who died not any particular person of note. IMHO we should keep the statues of the common men tricked into suck wars even if they were on the wrong and losing side. In my opinion, it is important to remember the human cost. Not glorify any leaders.

      https://pomortzeff.com/german