The removal of a Christopher Columbus statue from outside Columbus City Hall has led to a lawsuit by several Italian-American organizations and individuals who claim the action was both illegal and discriminatory. The complaint, filed on April 7, 2026 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio by a coalition including the Columbus Piave Club, Friends of Christopher Columbus Foundation, Conference Of Presidents Of Major Italian American Organizations, Abruzzi Club, Order Of The Sons & Daughters Of Italy, Columbus Italian Heritage Foundation, Giacomo Conte, Columbus Italian Club, The Estate Of Edoardo Alfieri, John Cardi, Rick Brunetto, and Landa Masdea Brunetto (the plaintiffs), names as defendants the City of Columbus; Mayor Andrew Ginther; members of the Columbus Art Commission; and seven federal agencies including the United States Department of Justice and Department of Housing and Urban Development.
According to court documents, the plaintiffs argue that “this case concerns the illegal — and discriminatory — removal of the Christopher Columbus Statue (the ‘Statue’) from Columbus City Hall.” They assert that since its installation in 1955 as part of an international exchange with Genoa, Italy—the birthplace of Christopher Columbus—the statue has served as a symbol for both Italian-American heritage in Central Ohio and friendship between Genoa and Columbus. The complaint states that in summer 2020 Mayor Andrew Ginther ordered its removal “notwithstanding his total lack of authority to do so,” claiming there was never any legal basis for this action or for keeping it absent from its original location.
The plaintiffs describe a history in which over 100,000 people attended the statue’s unveiling in 1955 during an event supported by both local officials and representatives from President Eisenhower’s administration. The document includes references to city council resolutions reaffirming this cultural relationship—including a unanimous resolution in 2015 celebrating sixty years since Genoa became Columbus’s first sister city. Plaintiffs maintain that neither their organizations nor representatives from Genoa consented to removing or storing away what they call “perhaps the most important piece of public artwork in all of Central Ohio.”
In addition to claims under contract law—arguing breach by failing to keep the statue on display as agreed—the lawsuit outlines alleged violations under several statutes:
– The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA): Plaintiffs contend that millions in federal funds have been distributed for projects affecting historic districts like Civic Center without required reviews regarding impact on historic properties such as this statue. They cite specific grant numbers awarded since fiscal year 2021 totaling more than $70 million.
– Federal constitutional rights: Plaintiffs claim deprivation under both Fifth Amendment due process protections (for not being given notice or compensation) and Fourteenth Amendment equal protection clauses. They argue that “Italian-Americans constitute a cognizable racial group through their common ancestry” and were targeted by these actions.
– State constitutional rights: Referencing Article I Section 2 of Ohio’s constitution guaranteeing equal protection for all citizens.
– Local charter violations: Alleging failures by city officials to follow protocols set out in preservation codes requiring proper review before altering or removing public art or monuments.
– Visual Artists Rights Act (VARA): The estate representing sculptor Edoardo Alfieri asserts ongoing moral rights over his work until at least 2068 due to his death in 1998.
The complaint further alleges that no approval was sought or granted by relevant preservation commissions before removing or storing away the artwork. It also contends that prolonged storage risks permanent damage because “the materials and composition… are not suitable for such long-term storage.” Plaintiffs request relief including restoration of the statue to its original location outside City Hall; prohibition on further funding violations; compensatory damages; punitive damages; attorneys’ fees; expert costs; specific performance on contractual obligations; injunctions against future removals without following legal protocols; as well as jury trial on all issues so triable.
Representing plaintiffs are attorneys George Bochetto and Ryan T. Kirk (Bochetto & Lentz PC) along with Joseph L. Piccin (Dougherty, Hanneman & Piccin LLC). The case is identified as Civil Action No. 2:26-cv-419.
Source: 226cv00419_Columbus_Piave_Club_v_City_of_Columbus_Complaint_Southern_District_Ohio.pdf
