A panel of federal appellate judges wrestled Wednesday, Dec 9, with the complex and conflicting legal claims over the fate of the Mount Soledad cross in the latest legal showdown in the long-running case. The 29-foot-tall cross in La Jolla has been the subject of litigation since 1989.

After nearly 45 minutes of arguments, it was difficult to tell which way the three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals was leaning.

Lawyers on both sides said the panel appeared, based solely on the questions asked, to be divided on the issue of whether the cross is an unconstitutional support of religion by the federal government.

A decision probably will not come for some time. The court is hearing an appeal from a war veterans organization, which sued the federal government in 2006 over the cross.

Congress had taken the land at the behest of cross supporters and administers it as a war memorial for veterans. But the American Civil Liberties Union, representing the Jewish War Veterans and three others, sued after the transfer, contending that the cross on public property violates the establishment clause of the U.S. Constitution.

Last year U.S. District Judge Larry A. Burns ruled in San Diego in favor of the government, saying the cross was but one element of a larger war memorial that had the secular goal of honoring service and sacrifice, and was not a religious endorsement.

The judges, especially Judge M. Margaret McKeown, who is based in San Diego for the appellate court, peppered lawyers on both sides Wednesday with questions concerning what judicial precedent should control the case and what the purpose of the memorial is.

McKeown also closely questioned lawyers on the wording of the bill Congress passed to take the land, and what it says about the intent legislators had in doing so. The bill said Congress wanted to honor fallen service members by taking a historically significant site, and honor the voters in San Diego who had approved the land transfer in an election.

For more, read here.