## Facts

- In 1887, private grantors conveyed a circular parcel on Monument Avenue in Richmond for use as a site for a Robert E. Lee monument, limiting the land to that purpose.
- In 1889, the General Assembly adopted a joint resolution authorizing the Governor to accept the monument and land for the Commonwealth and stating the site would be held “perpetually sacred” to the monument’s purpose.
- In 1890, the monument association deeded the monument and the parcel to the Commonwealth; the deed similarly stated the Commonwealth would hold the statue, pedestal, and ground “perpetually sacred” to the devoted purpose.
- In 2020, Governor Northam directed state officials to remove the Lee monument from the state-owned site.
- While litigation was pending, the General Assembly enacted a 2020 budget provision repealing the 1889 joint resolution and directing the responsible state agency to remove the monument.
- Nearby property owners/trustees sued to enjoin removal, alleging the deed language created restrictive covenants requiring perpetual maintenance and that removal would violate the Virginia Constitution and state law.

## Issues

1. Whether the 1890 deed and related instruments created restrictive covenants binding the Commonwealth to keep the monument on the site in perpetuity.
2. Whether the 1889 joint resolution and deed language could constitutionally limit the Commonwealth’s authority to control displays on its own property as government speech.
3. Whether current public policy, as expressed in the Virginia Constitution and statutes (including later legislation), rendered any such covenants unenforceable.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Virginia affirmed the denial of an injunction and upheld the Governor’s authority to order removal of the state-owned monument from state-owned property.
- The court agreed the 1890 deed contained restrictive-covenant-like language regarding the monument and the parcel.
- The court held any covenants requiring perpetual maintenance were unenforceable because they conflicted with current public policy and impermissibly attempted to bind future governmental decisions about public expression.
- The court treated the 2020 budget enactment repealing the 1889 joint resolution and directing removal as a valid expression of current legislative policy displacing earlier policy statements.
- The court rejected constitutional challenges, concluding the Commonwealth’s sovereign authority over public property and public expression could not be permanently surrendered by deed or prior legislative action.

## Legal Principles

- Restrictive covenants that conflict with current public policy, as expressed in the Commonwealth’s constitution and statutes, will not be enforced.
- One legislature cannot irreversibly restrict the legislative power of its successors; past policy choices may be repealed or amended by later legislatures.
- Decisions to erect, maintain, or remove monuments on public property are government speech; the Commonwealth must retain authority to determine what it will say through displays on its property.
- The Commonwealth’s sovereign and police powers cannot be contracted away in a manner that prevents future officials from exercising those powers consistent with present constitutional and legislative governance.

## Conclusion

The court held that neither the 1890 deed language nor the 1889 joint resolution could permanently require the Commonwealth to maintain the Lee monument, and it affirmed that removal was lawful because any purported perpetual restrictions were unenforceable under current public policy and the Commonwealth’s control of government speech on its property.


Taylor v. Northam, 300 Va. 230, 862 S.E.2d 458 (Va. 2021)