What was the result at the federal appellate court level in Trunk v.City of San Diego,the case in the text involving whether the presence of a cross on federal land near a Korean War memorial violated the First Amendment?
A)The court ruled that the presence of the cross violated the First Amendment.
B)The court ruled that the presence of the cross did not violate the First Amendment because although it was erected by public authorities,it had historical significance independent of its governmental ties.
C)The court ruled that the presence of the cross did not violate the First Amendment because it was initially erected by private parties and had historical significance.
D)The court ruled that the presence of the cross did not violate the First Amendment because although it did promote a particular religion,that religion was practiced by large numbers of the surrounding citizens.
E)The court ruled that the presence of the cross did not violate the First Amendment because the cross promoted the service of veterans,not a religion.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

A)According to the Ninth Circuit,"the prominence of the Cross in the Memorial,leads us to conclude that a reasonable observer would perceive the Memorial as projecting a message of religious endorsement,not simply secular memorialization," and was therefore found to violate the establishment clause.
B)According to the Ninth Circuit,"the prominence of the Cross in the Memorial,leads us to conclude that a reasonable observer would perceive the Memorial as projecting a message of religious endorsement,not simply secular memorialization," and was therefore found to violate the establishment clause.
C)According to the Ninth Circuit,"the prominence of the Cross in the Memorial,leads us to conclude that a reasonable observer would perceive the Memorial as projecting a message of religious endorsement,not simply secular memorialization," and was therefore found to violate the establishment clause.
D)According to the Ninth Circuit,"the prominence of the Cross in the Memorial,leads us to conclude that a reasonable observer would perceive the Memorial as projecting a message of religious endorsement,not simply secular memorialization," and was therefore found to violate the establishment clause.
E)According to the Ninth Circuit,"the prominence of the Cross in the Memorial,leads us to conclude that a reasonable observer would perceive the Memorial as projecting a message of religious endorsement,not simply secular memorialization," and was therefore found to violate the establishment clause.

What Was the Result at the Federal Appellate Court Level