By DAVID KRAVETS, Associated Press Writer
34 minutes ago
SAN FRANCISCO - A federal judge declared the reciting of the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools unconstitutional Wednesday, a decision that could put the divisive issue on track for another round of Supreme Court arguments.
The case was brought by the same atheist whose previous battle against the words "under God" was rejected last year by the Supreme Court on procedural grounds.
U.S. District Judge Lawrence Karlton ruled that the pledge's reference to one nation "under God" violates school children's right to be "free from a coercive requirement to affirm God."
Karlton said he was bound by precedent of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which in 2002 ruled in favor of Sacramento atheist Michael Newdow that the pledge is unconstitutional when recited in public schools.
The Supreme Court dismissed the case last year, saying Newdow lacked standing because he did not have custody of his elementary school daughter he sued on behalf of.
Newdow, an attorney and a medical doctor, filed an identical case on behalf of three unnamed parents and their children. Karlton said those families have the right to sue.
Newdow hopes that will make it more likely the merits of his case will be addressed by the high court.
"All it has to do is put the pledge as it was before, and say that we are one nation, indivisible, instead of dividing us on religious basis," Newdow told The Associated Press.
"Imagine every morning if the teachers had the children stand up, place their hands over their hearts, and say, 'We are one nation that denies God exists,'" Newdow said.
"I think that everybody would not be sitting here saying, 'Oh, what harm is that.' They'd be furious. And that's exactly what goes on against atheists. And it shouldn't."
Karlton, ruling in Sacramento, said he would sign a restraining order preventing the recitation of the pledge at the Elk Grove Unified, Rio Linda and Elverta Joint Elementary school districts in Sacramento County, where the plaintiffs' children attend.
The order would not extend beyond those districts unless it is affirmed by the 9th Circuit, in which case it could apply to nine western states, or the Supreme Court, which would apply to all states.
The decision sets up another showdown over the pledge in schools, at a time when the makeup of the Supreme Court is in flux.
Wednesday's ruling comes as Supreme Court nominee John Roberts faces day three of his confirmation hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee. He would succeed the late William H. Rehnquist as chief justice.
In July, Sandra Day O'Connor announced her plans to retire when a successor is confirmed.
The Becket Fund, a religious rights group that is a party to the case, said it would immediately appeal the case to the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. If the court does not change its precedent, the group would go to the Supreme Court.
"It's a way to get this issue to the Supreme Court for a final decision to be made," said fund attorney Jared Leland.
The decisions by Karlton and the 9th Circuit conflict with an August opinion by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va. That court upheld a Virginia law requiring public schools lead daily Pledge of Allegiance recitation, which is similar to the requirement in California.
A three-judge panel of that circuit ruled that the pledge is a patriotic exercise, not a religious affirmation similar to a prayer.
"Undoubtedly, the pledge contains a religious phrase, and it is demeaning to persons of any faith to assert that the words `under God' contain no religious significance," Judge Karen Williams wrote for the 4th Circuit. "The inclusion of those two words, however, does not alter the nature of the pledge as a patriotic activity."
Karlton, appointed to the Sacramento bench in 1979 by President Carter, wrote that the case concerned "the ongoing struggle as to the role of religion in the civil life of this nation" and added that his opinion "will satisfy no one involved in that debate."
Karlton dismissed claims that the 1954 Congressional legislation inserting the words "under God" was unconstitutional. If his ruling stands, he reasoned that the school children and their parents in the case would not be harmed by the phrase because they would no longer have to recite it at school.
Terence Cassidy, a lawyer representing the school districts, said he was reviewing the opinion and was not immediately prepared to comment
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050915/ap_ ... NlYwM3MTY-
Judge: School Pledge Is Unconstitutional
Judge: School Pledge Is Unconstitutional
brembo wrote:"This is a stick-up...I have an armadillo in my pants"
-
mountainman
- SG VIP
- Posts: 15451
- Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2000 12:00 am
- Location: Colorado
-
AceFireball
- Posts: 2530
- Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2002 12:00 pm
- Location: Greenville, NC
-
mountainman
- SG VIP
- Posts: 15451
- Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2000 12:00 am
- Location: Colorado
downhill wrote:Yep...the plaintiff has a different angle.
The whole thing is ludicrous on both sides of the coin. Fundamentalism is strafing this country....from both sides...those who insist that God is in every thing except their corn flakes and those that want everything godless except lawsuits...
well..FWIW ..i was recently at a meeting with a US Bankrutpcy Court Trustee ..a 341 meeting of creditors... they no longer mention God when swearing someone in ...
Offensive
wow that would be weird... i would like be waiting for them to finish.Izzo wrote:well..FWIW ..i was recently at a meeting with a US Bankrutpcy Court Trustee ..a 341 meeting of creditors... they no longer mention God when swearing someone in ...
brembo wrote:"This is a stick-up...I have an armadillo in my pants"
Meggie wrote:wow that would be weird... i would like be waiting for them to finish.
oh maybe im thinking of something else...
That the whole "do u swear to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you god" thing?
What about in court? do they still do that? hand on the bible and all that?
brembo wrote:"This is a stick-up...I have an armadillo in my pants"
Meggie wrote:oh maybe im thinking of something else...
That the whole "do u swear to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you god" thing?
What about in court? do they still do that? hand on the bible and all that?
no , the trustee just asked the person being interviewed to raise their right hand ..no bible ..nothing .. and then asked the question
Offensive
Vitarroz or Goya for him.downhill wrote:What? No Rice A Roni?
SG Pimp Name : *Treacherous P. Shizzle*
*
The fight for our way of life needs to be fought on our own soil, for our own people and because of our own interests.
*
Hey, If Me & My Buddies Were Making Billions of Dollars I'd Tell Ya What Ya Wanted To Hear Too!
*
The fight for our way of life needs to be fought on our own soil, for our own people and because of our own interests.
*
Hey, If Me & My Buddies Were Making Billions of Dollars I'd Tell Ya What Ya Wanted To Hear Too!
I would have thought the real patriots of your country would be happy that someone is standing up for what's correct and right. under your own constitution. Instead, I see comments like "stupid athiests", or "people should just shut the **** up" or even "that's why you stand up and not recite it". Sad thing is, this over the top patriotism and religious crap is instilled in children from a very young age in America. It's criminal in it's own way.
But I guess there are even more of you out there who would call someone unpatriotic, or claim they didn't like the US, if they didn't recite some stupid pledge. Oh well.
But I guess there are even more of you out there who would call someone unpatriotic, or claim they didn't like the US, if they didn't recite some stupid pledge. Oh well.
stevebakh wrote:I would have thought the real patriots of your country would be happy that someone is standing up for what's correct and right. under your own constitution. Instead, I see comments like "stupid athiests", or "people should just shut the **** up" or even "that's why you stand up and not recite it". Sad thing is, this over the top patriotism and religious crap is instilled in children from a very young age in America. It's criminal in it's own way.
But I guess there are even more of you out there who would call someone unpatriotic, or claim they didn't like the US, if they didn't recite some stupid pledge. Oh well.
It is actually one of those ideal right wing sticking points. Truth is, it is irrelevent. In a class room, if five children choose not to say under G-d, it will probably go unnoticed. Should the phrase even be there, no. However to bring it up, gives the right wing media pundits and their news outlets a fluff topic to keen for months. In a sense, giving them an opportunity to deflect news that is germane.
In all fairness, the left wing media has their screed as well. Violence in video games is one of their "soft topic".
News in America is probably the cause of the majority of neurosis. It would not surprise me to see the makers of tricyclics funding said programs.
Hell_Yes
Luck is where preparation meets opportunity - Seneca
"Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'" - Isaac Asimov
It is my ambition to say in ten sentences what others say in a whole book. - Friedrich Nietzsche
From what I've heard, it different from school to school. Some classes couldn't care less whether you recited the pledge or not, others still single out children and even send them to the principles office for not reciting the pledge. Whether it's peer pressure or being singled out by your teacher - I'd class that as forced recital and it's wrong.
Meh..I'd like to think there are those that won't put up with some of the crap that goes on here and do something about it.....personally i am indifferent to this situation....I would consider myself a patriotic person but there are times when i just shake my head ....stevebakh wrote:I would have thought the real patriots of your country would be happy that someone is standing up for what's correct and right. under your own constitution. Instead, I see comments like "stupid athiests", or "people should just shut the **** up" or even "that's why you stand up and not recite it". Sad thing is, this over the top patriotism and religious crap is instilled in children from a very young age in America. It's criminal in it's own way.
But I guess there are even more of you out there who would call someone unpatriotic, or claim they didn't like the US, if they didn't recite some stupid pledge. Oh well.
.....it is getting difficult for to me distinguish between standing up for what is right and another frivilous lawsuit.
Offensive
stevebakh wrote:It's bound to though - something this large.
..to me I don't really see this as a big deal. I understand for him and those that think alike it is but I really could not care less about it.
my posts earlier were simply an observation that the words 'under god' were not recited when taking an oath in a court of law here....it's been a while since i've been to court
Offensive
The courts in this state never have. What's the point of swearing an oath to God to be truthful, if say your not religious?
Even the pious aren't immune to lying.
That being said, religious or not, people lie all the time. The oath to be truthful when put on the stand doesn't need an oath to God. Man has their own laws governing lying on a witness stand.
Even the pious aren't immune to lying.
That being said, religious or not, people lie all the time. The oath to be truthful when put on the stand doesn't need an oath to God. Man has their own laws governing lying on a witness stand.
stevebakh wrote:From what I've heard, it different from school to school. Some classes couldn't care less whether you recited the pledge or not, others still single out children and even send them to the principles office for not reciting the pledge. Whether it's peer pressure or being singled out by your teacher - I'd class that as forced recital and it's wrong.
I am not corroborating that it is proper to force recital or that the phrase belongs in the pledge (The history of it has been previously discussed), only that it is a political talking point. Certainly it is an issue, however it often used rallying cry by opponents to misdirect from concerns of far greater importance.
Hell_Yes
Luck is where preparation meets opportunity - Seneca
"Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'" - Isaac Asimov
It is my ambition to say in ten sentences what others say in a whole book. - Friedrich Nietzsche
Hell_Yes wrote:I am not corroborating that it is proper to force recital or that the phrase belongs in the pledge (The history of it has been previously discussed), only that it is a political talking point. Certainly it is an issue, however it often used rallying cry by opponents to misdirect from concerns of far greater importance.
Yep, that's what I meant .
Offensive
-
Ghosthunter
- SG VIP
- Posts: 18183
- Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2001 12:00 pm
downhill wrote:Yep...the plaintiff has a different angle.
The whole thing is ludicrous on both sides of the coin. Fundamentalism is strafing this country....from both sides...those who insist that God is in every thing except their corn flakes and those that want everything godless except lawsuits...
i agree..
IMO this is not a real issue.
Damn good point.downhill wrote:Yep...the plaintiff has a different angle.
The whole thing is ludicrous on both sides of the coin. Fundamentalism is strafing this country....from both sides...those who insist that God is in every thing except their corn flakes and those that want everything godless except lawsuits...
Stupidity is also a gift of God, but one mustn't misuse it. - JP II
-
Leatherneck
- Senior Member
- Posts: 3655
- Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2000 12:00 am
- Location: The Great Midwest