Parks only for Emperors and Kings

The Supreme Court recently unanimously denied that a religious group had a free speech right to place a monument to its "Seven Aphorisms" in a town public park near where a monument to the Ten Commandments has stood for decades.

Why you may ask?

Justice Alito writes:

Governments have long used monuments to speak to the public. Since ancient times, kings, emperors, and other rulers have erected statutes of themselves to remind their subjects of their authority and power. Triumphal arches, columns, and other monuments have been built to commemorate military victories and sacrifices and other events of civic importance. A monument, by definition, is a structure that is designed as a means of expression. When a government entity arranges for the construction of a monument, it does so because it wishes to convey some thought or instill some feeling in those who see the structure...

Accordingly... Government decision makers select the monuments that portray what they view as appropriate for the place in question, taking into account such content-based factors as esthetics, history, and local culture.

The accepted monuments are meant to convey and have the effect of conveying a government message and thus constitute government speech.

Even when a monument features the written word the monument may be intended to be interpreted, and may in fact be interpreted by different observers, in a variety of ways.

Leaders don't put up many statues to themselves these days, no work would get done with all the giggling the public would do.

Pigeons have the right idea.