Federal Judge Rules Against Pledge of Allegiance In Schools
Live from San Francisco…
God help us.
AP reports: “The Pledge of Allegiance was ruled unconstitutional Wednesday by a federal judge who granted legal standing to two families represented by an atheist whose previous attempt to get the pledge out of public schools was rejected by the U.S. Supreme Court. ”
UPDATE: AP has more:
“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 timing is apropos, underscoring the need for having a conservative Justice on the bench. Hugh Hewitt agrees.
Incidentally, what freedom from the “coercive requirement(s)” of political correctness, classroom activists and teachers of revisionist history do our school children have???
UPDATE II: SF Chronicle reports.
UPDATE III: Michael Newdow v. George W. Bush (PDF)
It appears that Mr. Newdow doesn’t “care” only about protecting school children from pledging allegiance. In fact, he also tried to prevent any prayer at the Presidential Inauguration. This action reveals that his ultimate goal is not to “protect” freedom of religion, but to purge religion from America.
From the legal brief:
“[Newdow] seeks a declaratory judgment and preliminary injunction to prohibit a practice that has existed for almost seventy years through invited clergy, and that arguably can be traced back to the Inauguration of President George Washington in 1789.”
Washington Post has the story.
Don Feder asks, “What is it about the Left and God? Why do the mildest public expressions of faith drive them nuts? Is there a connection between the treason of liberals and their war on religious expression?”
Michelle Malkin is following the story.
Also blogging:
Instapundit jokes, “Karl Rove must have arranged this”
AnkleBiting Pundits: Judge Karlton is a Carter appointee
SisterToldjah, notes “Score one for the Newdow crowd”
LaShawn Barber suggests: “Homeschool your children!”
Mark Tapscott agrees
Protein Wisdom has rebuttals from the archives
Howie at My Pet Jawa: “Frisco,” indeed.
Powerline asks, “Encore?”
StopTheACLU: We say, now more than ever
AllThingsConservative examines Judge Karlton
Volokh has polls, “public seems solidly against [the decision]”
ConservativeThinking quips, “Only in San Francisco…” Sadly.
Ace of Spades weighs in
Michael Williams declares, “patently absurd”
Patterico pontificates, Karlton “screwed up” (and explains why)
Mayor Sam Yorty shakes his head and says “sad”
Xrlq rules on Karlton: “Moron Judge of the day”
CA Mafia opines: “Here we go again”
RightSpin says, “Secularism wins”
Darleen quips, “Halloween comes a bit early to Frisco”
FullosseousFlap (with a great pic)
Outside The Beltway
Ed Driscoll: “Karl Rove is laughing like a giddy schoolgirl”
American Princess calls the ruling “a load of poop”
Mark in Mexico has more news off the wires
RightThinking: “…another crazy, fringe minority has won a battle”
PoliticalTeen points out: “Atheists account for 902,000 or [only] 0.4% of the US population. Those who believe in a God or some sort of a higher being account for over 86% of the US population. It is amazing that such a small minority can rule over a large majority.”
Indeed.
RELATED:
History of the Pledge
FOXNews Interview with Newdow: “Under God” Under Fire
Larry Elder: Taking The Pledge
Lowell Ponte: Under G*d
Michael Newdow vs. America
September 14th, 2005 at 11:46 am
The Peanut Farmer Strikes Again
Nominated by Jimmy Carter, go figure.
September 14th, 2005 at 11:57 am
One Nation Under God No More
Hat tip to California Conservative
Judge Declares Pledge Unconstitutional
The Pledge of Allegiance was ruled unconstitutional Wednesday by a federal judge who granted legal standing to two families represented by an atheist whose previous attempt to…
September 14th, 2005 at 12:05 pm
It is ironic that those who wish to place their religion prominently in front of every citizen of this nation complain about being discriminated against.
I feel that this argument about the pledge of allegiance/abortion/everything has more to do with people’s desire to have the power to exert moral control over other people’s lives - and has little to do with any specific belief in a god.
The way I see it, the authority various churches traditionally have had over citizen’s lives were for a time drastically reduced due to massive demographic and economic shifts in the U.S. following World War II. Mega-churches, and televangelism, have bridged the gap that our sprawled-out suburban lifestyles have created - and so religious people are trying to re-claim their place as arbiters of morality.
A lot of people have always resented the power that Christian moral rules have imposed on their lifestyle. The rhetoric of people who want kids doing the pledge has little to do with actually saying the pledge - but, to me, has more to do with the fact that they can make us say anything at all for religious reasons.
I would suggest that people pick their fights. There is a place for religion in modern, secular, life.
It will either be a place based on religious-fascist political ideology, or one that honestly allows for public acknowledgement of religious ideas without persecuting people who don’t believe in whatever given faith happens to be testifying to its own greatness.
September 14th, 2005 at 12:28 pm
Judge Rules Pledge Unconstitutional
A federal judge, with a long history (see last paragraph) of liberal activism, has ruled that the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools unconstitutional:Reciting the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools was declared unconstitutiona…
September 14th, 2005 at 12:30 pm
Now the Supreme Court will at least have to decide the issue…
http://jcb.pentex-net.com/archives/2005/09/the_unconstitut.html
September 14th, 2005 at 12:49 pm
Freedom of Religion and Speech Stripped Away
I Pledge Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
September 14th, 2005 at 1:27 pm
If You Haven’t Gotten the Message Yet…
…I’ll say it again. If you can’t afford private schools, HOMESCHOOL YOUR CHILDREN!
Why fight for the right to recite the pledge in government schools when those same schools teach that perversion is normal, America is racist, and W…
September 14th, 2005 at 1:50 pm
Moron Judge of the Day: Lawrence Karlton
Law 101: The Supreme Court trumps the Ninth Circuit every time.
…
September 14th, 2005 at 4:14 pm
Just to be clear, this is about whether the government can force kids to say the pledge in schools as it is currently amended with the “under God” wording, not about whether people in general are allowed to recite it.
This is about big government forcing people to think a certain way, vs. liberty and freedom from governmentally imposed behaviour.
September 14th, 2005 at 4:32 pm
Dave, sorry to say, you’re wrong.
Currently, government has nothing to do with the matter. There’s no program or subsidy promoting the pledge. For the last 50 years, quite simply, many schools (not all) have been leading their students with the pledge of allegiance because it is tradition - and what is a nation without traditions. Each student retains the right (and freedom) to say “under God” or not. No force applied.
However, by way of this ruling, government is, indeed, forcing schools (teachers) not to recite the pledge. Government is forcing school children never to know the pledge. And forcing parents to conform.
By making laws that dictate social practices (either by allowing OR forbidding), government is imposing behavior. Don’t you see that?
Thanks for reading.
September 14th, 2005 at 4:52 pm
Big Government vs Liberty
The headlines frame it in the Right’s preferred language: Judge: School Pledge Is Unconstitutional and Judge rules Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional and Federal judge declares Pledge unconstitutional and Judge: School Pledge Is Unconstitutional. T…
September 14th, 2005 at 8:01 pm
I don’t remember being forced to go to the principal’s office for acting up in class, but it sure felt mandatory and unavoidable to me when I was a child.
A child that is taught to say the pledge of allegiance is not exactly a rational adult making an informed decision - so reciting the pledge does seem mandatory and unavoidable in class. So, California Conservative, I think you are wrong.
I don’t think that anyone is going to convert to a Christian faith just because they said the pledge of allegiance with “under God” in it. Yet pledging, or deciding not to pledge, allegiance under a God that one does not believe in is a bit unfair, isn’t it?
I really think that this issue, and other so-called “religious rights” issues, are brought up to re-enable a more traditional role for Christian institutions in this country.
This is a wedge issue, brought up to divide religious left-wingers from those who oppose this traditional situation. Whether or not someone says “under God” is a technicality that really affects no one, but is made to be symbol of one side’s craven desires. It’s simlar to the whole flag burning issue, with a whole layer of religious overtones attached to it.
The power of this issue to make religion seem so important is great for churches - all of a sudden they are important again! There are more people in church these days than any time during the 20th century. These institutions are moving to regain the power that religious institutions typically have had to dictate social norms and sexual behavior. I don’t know about you, but I don’t want someone in a funny hat or strange clothes telling me who I can or can’t marry - unless I ask for their opinion first.
September 14th, 2005 at 10:19 pm
[...] pm
California Conservative has lots of links regarding today’s ruling that the Pledge of Allegiance is unconstitutional. You can read the opinion here.
[...]
September 15th, 2005 at 10:43 am
California Conservative, I’m sorry to say, but it is not Dave, but YOU who are wrong. In Virginia, the public school day starts with a recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance. If you don’t think that for a young kid, social pressures to conform don’t equate to being ‘forced’ to follow the crowd, I think you’re mistaken. I abstained from the Pledge when I was a kid, and don’t you bet that it didn’t make me popular! Who’s the kid who hates America? Who’s the kid who thinks he’s better than everyone else!? I love the Pledge in it’s original form, and it needs to be returned to it. We are no longer fighting a Cold Ware against a ‘Godless Communist State’ which inspired the change to prove we were superior to them. I want my duaghter to say the pledge in school, I want her to feel the joy and the unity in raising her voice in celebration of what this Country is and stands for, and with those two little words left in, I don’t think she’ll be able to. The Pledge is about unifying, and not dividing, and with those words left in, that’s what it does….
September 15th, 2005 at 4:58 pm
[...] raquo; Roberts Confirmation Hearing: Day Three » How To Be A First-Responder » Federal Judge Rules Agains [...]
September 16th, 2005 at 2:59 pm
Last time I checked, no one had a general First Amendment “right” to be popular or free of social pressures, which is why I find it rather odd anyone asserts such a right in this context. And contrary to Newdow revisionism, the version of the Pledge you call the “original” one, isn’t, having been written in 1924 and not adopted by Congress until 1942, a whopping 12 years before today’s version was enacted. By now, the current version of the Pledge has been around for 51 years, a lot longer than either of the two versions that preceded it, slightly longer than both of them combined, and considerably longer than the Ten Commandments display that the Supreme Court just upheld in part because it was so old.
I actually agree with you that the Pledge probably would be better without the reference to God, but this is for Congress to decide, not the courts. And it certainly should not be left to a pinhead judge who is too dumb to understand that he’s not bound by the precedent of a case that has been overruled.
September 16th, 2005 at 3:16 pm
[...] Service at the Washington National Cathedral in Washington, D.C. Note to Michael Newdow: Go stuff it. “On this National Day of Prayer and Remembrance, we pledge ourse [...]
November 7th, 2005 at 6:50 pm
[...] Such is the demonstrated success of America’s anti-religion movement. With the ongoing assault by atheists such as Michael Newdow and left-wing activists like the ACLU, God is the perceived enemy and a faithless society is encouraged. [...]
November 13th, 2005 at 10:33 pm
[...] The 9th Circuit Court is standing by. And the ACLU says, “Hallelujah!” [...]