A small Christian club in San Francisco is vowing to continue its legal fight after a judge ruled that a 28-foot cross on disputed property must be removed. According to a legal complaint, the battle for the Albany Lions Club has been years in the making, when a group called the “East Bay Atheists” claimed the cross was on City property and that the cross was structurally unsound. The group also claimed that the cross gave “a preference of one religion over others, offends some members of the city’s diverse communities, is reminiscent of KKK cross-burnings in the East Bay hills in the 1920s, and is an eyesore.” The cross was found to be structurally sound, but the city demanded that the cross be disconnected from the utility line, claiming it was unsafe due to passing through tree branches. The club routinely lit the cross on special occasions such as Easter and Christmas, making the cross visible from a distance. The Lions Club alleged that it was being discriminated against due to the cross’s religious nature. In 2016, the Albany City council voted to remove the cross, claiming the easement that the cross sits on belongs to the city and not the club. The club has maintained the cross since 1971 and claims the property is part of the club’s private property.

In 2018, a judge ruled that the cross violated the Establishment clause and stated the city had to sell the land it was on to a private party or acquire an easement through eminent domain. In January 2023, an Alameda County judge ruled the cross was not protected under the free exercise clause. It was removed in June. The Lions Club is now being represented by the Pacific Justice Institute (PJI) with the group’s president, Brad Dacus, underlying the group’s commitment to the case. “The First Amendment of the Constitution protects individuals and private entities from such blatant state hostility to those wishing to express symbols of faith and hope. We at PJI are committed to defending such constitutionally protected expression,” he said Speaking to Fox News, Dacus said he believed the city had an agenda in going after the cross. “If there was a giant LGBT flag or something like that, this city would embrace it. No problem. So, it’s specifically because of the viewpoint and the religious viewpoint and perspective of the cross. That’s their agenda,” he said.

Dacus added that the city was clearly hostile to the club due to their Christian faith. “It is a vicious, blatant, anti-constitutional, discriminatory action by the City of Albany. And that’s what makes this case so shocking. You know, the city didn’t even hide it.” He also warned about the city’s use of eminent domain to remove the cross. “The takings clause doesn’t allow the government to take property because they don’t like the religious speech. If they could get away with this, make no mistake, then they could get away with taking down a church with eminent domain, or any other kind of religious entity or organization. And, of course, we all know that the Constitution forbids that.”