| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
14 Sep 2005 02:34:33 PM |
| Object: |
School Pledge Unconstitutional! |
Judge: School Pledge Is Unconstitutional
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/14/AR2005091401521.html
[EXCERPT]
By DAVID KRAVETS
The Associated Press
Wednesday, September 14, 2005; 3:19 PM
SAN FRANCISCO -- A federal judge declared the reciting of the Pledge of
Allegiance in public schools unconstitutional Wednesday in a case brought
by the same atheist whose previous battle against the words "under God" was
rejected by the U.S. 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.
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
a higher court, in which case it would apply to nine western 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.
[END EXCERPT]
***************************************************************
Posting and reading from alt.politics.usa.constitution OR alt.education
You are invited to check out the following:
The Rise of the Theocratic States of America
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocracy.htm
American Theocrats - Past and Present
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocrats.htm
The Constitutional Principle: Separation of Church and State
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
[and to join the discussion group for the above site and/or Separation of
Church and State in general, listed below]
HRSepCnS · Hampton Roads SepChurch&State
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HRSepCnS/
[Its not just Hampton Roads folks who are members]
***************************************************************
.. . . You can't understand a phrase such as "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion" by syllogistic reasoning. Words
take their meaning from social as well as textual contexts, which is why "a
page of history is worth a volume of logic." New York Trust Co. v. Eisner,
256 U.S. 345, 349, 41 S.Ct. 506, 507, 65 L.Ed. 963 (1921) (Holmes, J.).
Sherman v. Community Consol. Dist. 21, 980 F.2d 437, 445 (7th Cir. 1992)
.. . .
****************************************************************
THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE:
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
****************************************************************
.
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: School Pledge Unconstitutional! |
17 Sep 2005 10:40:26 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 15:34:33 -0400, wrote:
Judge: School Pledge Is Unconstitutional
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/14/AR2005091401521.html
[EXCERPT]
By DAVID KRAVETS
The Associated Press
Wednesday, September 14, 2005; 3:19 PM
SAN FRANCISCO -- A federal judge declared the reciting of the Pledge of
Allegiance in public schools unconstitutional Wednesday in a case brought
by the same atheist whose previous battle against the words "under God" was
rejected by the U.S. 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.
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
a higher court, in which case it would apply to nine western 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.
[END EXCERPT]
Judge Rules Pledge of Allegiance in Calif. Schools Unconstitutional
By John Pomfret
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, September 15, 2005; A03
LOS ANGELES, Sept. 14 -- A federal judge ruled Wednesday that the law
requiring the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools
is unconstitutional and said he was ready to issue an injunction to
three California school districts to halt the daily reciting of the
pledge.
Terming the case "a cause celebre in the ongoing struggle as to the
role of religion in the civil life of this nation," U.S. District
Judge Lawrence Karlton ruled that the pledge's reference to "one
nation under God" violates children's right to be "free from a
coercive requirement to affirm God."
Michael A. Newdow, the atheist resident of Sacramento whose previous
case against the pledge's words "under God" was rejected last year by
the Supreme Court on procedural grounds, said he will ask the judge to
issue a restraining order halting the pledge at the Elk Grove Unified,
Rio Linda and Elverta Joint Elementary school districts in Sacramento
County. A lawyer for the districts told the Associated Press he was
not prepared to comment on the case.
Newdow, speaking from his cell phone in El Paso, Tex., said he was
pleased by the verdict but expects a tough legal fight ahead. "It'll
be emotional when it's ruled that all Americans should be treated
equally," he said. "This is a start towards that, but we still have a
ways to go." He said he wants the Pledge of Allegiance restored to its
original text, approved by Congress in 1942, with no mention of God.
Jared Leland, a lawyer for the Washington-based Becket Fund for
Religious Liberty, which fought the case, said he had expected the
verdict but that his group, which represented students and parents of
students in the case, will appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
9th Circuit. In the case, Leland also represented the Knights of
Columbus, which started using the revised pledge in 1951 as the Cold
War heated up. The Knights lobbied Congress and the Eisenhower
administration to officially change the pledge in 1954.
"The pendulum is swinging in the wrong direction in our country,"
Leland said. "Mike Newdow is on a train whose destination is designed
to hide and undermine the role of religion in public life. We want to
restore religion to the public square."
In his ruling, which he acknowledged will "satisfy no one involved" in
the debate about the role of religion in public life, Karlton said he
was bound by precedent from the appeals court, which in 2002 ruled in
favor of Newdow that the pledge is unconstitutional when recited in
public schools.
Last year, the Supreme Court dismissed the case, saying that Newdow
lacked standing because he did not have custody of his elementary
school daughter, on whose behalf he sued.
Newdow then filed a similar suit on behalf of three unnamed parents
and their children. Karlton, ruling in Sacramento, said those families
have the right to sue and, arguing that he was bowing to the 9th
Circuit court's initial ruling on the pledge, ruled in their favor.
Wednesday's ruling increases the chance that the case could return to
the Supreme Court because the 9th Circuit's ruling on Newdow's suit
clashes with an opinion, issued in August, by the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the 4th Circuit in Richmond. That court upheld a Virginia
law requiring public schools to lead daily Pledge of Allegiance
recitation, saying the pledge is a patriotic exercise, not a religious
affirmation similar to a prayer.
Staff writer Sonya Geis contributed to this report.
© 2005 The Washington Post Company
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
"As democracy is perfected, the office of president
represents, more and more closely, the inner soul
of the people. On some great and glorious day the
plain folks of the land will reach their heart's
desire at last and the White House will be adorned
by a downright moron." --- H.L. Mencken (1880 - 1956)
Religion is the original war crime.
-Michelle Malkin (Feb 26, 2005)
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
