In 1971 one of the Ten Commandments monuments was donated to Pleasant Grove City, Utah. It was placed in a city park along with a number of buildings, monuments, plaques and memorials that according to the city, "either portray the Mormon pioneer-era heritage of Pleasant Grove, or are contributions of local civic groups. The case of Summum v. Pleasant Grove City does not involve an Establishment Clause challenge to the display or the monument or any effort to remove it. Quite to the contrary, Summum, best described as a non-traditional religious group in Utah, wants to erect another monument containing the Seven Aphorisms of Summum in the park next to the Ten Commandments monument.  The present case arose when the city denied Summum's request to erect this monument.
 
Summum was founded in 1975 and headquartered in Salt Lake City, Utah.  Summum incorporates elements of Gnostic Christianity, teaching that spiritual knowledge is experiential and that through devotion comes revelation, which "modifies human perception and transfigures the individual." Summum produces "Nectar Publications," which are nectars containing alcohol and are used in Sunni meditations. Summum practices mummification and provides this service for people and for pets. Central to Summum religious belief and practice are the Seven Aphorisms. According to Summum doctrine, the Seven Aphorisms were inscribed on the original tablets handed down by God to Moses on Mount Sinai. Because Moses believed that the Israelites were not ready to receive the Aphorisms, he shared them only with a select group of people. Moses then destroyed the original tablets, returned to Mount Sinai and returned with a second set of tablets containing the Ten Commandments. It is fair to say that Summum is not very popular with the Mormon Religious Establishment or the government in Utah.
 

Summum has made a number of efforts to force Utah cities that display a Ten Commandments monument to also display a Seven Aphorisms of Summum monument. In Summum v. City of Ogden, 297 F.3d 995 (10th Cir. 2002), the Tenth Circuit held that the lawn of the municipal building, containing a gallery of permanent monuments, was a nonpublic forum and that the display of the Ten Commandments was not government speech. It went on to hold that denying the request to place the Seven Aphorisms of Summum monument in this nonpublic forum was discrimination against religious speech, in violation of the Free Speech guarantee of the First Amendment. Apparently Summum was successful in asserting its First Amendment claims against other Utah cities, and according to Wikipedia, Utah cities "elected to remove their Ten Commandments monument rather than allow Summum to erect its Seven Aphorisms monument."
 
In Pleasant Grove, the Tenth Circuit held that Summum was entitled to a preliminary injunction requiring the city to permit the display of Summum's monument in the city park containing the Ten Commandments. Here it found that the city park was a traditional public forum, and that this content-based restriction on speech could not be justified under the compelling governmental interest standard. It rejected the city's argument that the display of the monument in the park did not constitute government speech and its argument that the municipal park was not a public forum for the erection and permanent display of monuments proposed by private parties. In this regard, the city had argued that the park was a non-public forum, and that it was reasonable for the city to limit permanent displays to those that "either portray the Mormon pioneer-era heritage of Pleasant Grove, or are contributions of local civic groups."
 
These arguments will shape the issues before the Supreme Court. The issues are: (1) whether the display of the Ten Commandments monument in the park is government speech and so not subject to challenge under the First Amendment's free speech clause; (2) whether the park is a public forum for First Amendment purposes; (3) in the event that the Court holds that the park is not a "public forum," is the limitation of permanent displays to those that "either portray the Mormon pioneer-era heritage of Pleasant Grove, or are contributions of local civic groups" a reasonable restriction on access to the non-public forum?