relating to the religious displays and the policies at issue in Chabad House and in this case are not similar. In Chabad House, the airport displayed non-religious decorations and prevented all private displays at O’Hare, including religious displays of the type at issue in this case. The court held that this situation did not constitute discrimination against religion. The City could use its own property to send a non-religious holiday message without opening its property to messages by others. In this case, by contrast, the Policy selectively allows private access for secular holiday displays, while excluding access for all private holiday displays expressing a religious viewpoint. 13 . The Rosenberger Court stated: It does not violate th 936 F.2d 109 (2d Cir.1991) (per curiam) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 112 S.Ct. 3026, 120
holding that display of solitary semipermanent menorah in city hall park closely associated with seat of city government violates the establishment clause holding that the display of a privately sponsored creche on the staircase of the courthouse violated the establishment clause because the display actually favored sectarian religious expression holding that the display of a creche as a part of a public christmas display depicts the historical origins of this traditional event long recognized as a national holiday holding that establishment of christmas day as legal public holiday did not violate establishment clause holding that display of unattended menorah in city hall park quite close to seat of government violated establishment clause because its combination alongside a secular holiday display did not cause a viewer to see the exhibit as a whole or as a unitary symbol