Inside Bay Area - Alameda Times-Star - Op-Ed: "Top court should resolve pledge dispute
DID you really think the Pledge of Allegiance issue had gone away? It may have faded from our memory, but Michael Newdow knew his crusade to delete 'under God' from the daily ritual for thousands of school children was far from over.
We knew the issue would surface again. If you need a reason why, look no further than the Supreme Court and, ironically, this is where the issue should end up.
Here's how it's playing out. Newdow, an atheist doctor and lawyer whose daughter attended school in Elk Grove, challenged the pledge's reference to God, saying that it unjustly forces religious beliefs into classrooms. In 2002, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed "... more>>>
Elk Grove School District - Newdow - Unconstitutional Pledge
Federal Judge Declares Pledge Of Allegiance Unconstitutional
POSTED: 2:07 pm EDT September 14, 2005
UPDATED: 3:49 pm EDT September 14, 2005
SAN FRANCISCO -- A federal judge in San Francisco ruled Wednesday it is unconstitutional for public school children to recite the Pledge of Allegiance.
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's bound by precedent set by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which ruled in 2002 that it was unconstitutional for the Pledge to be recited in public schools.
The Supreme Court threw out that case, ruling that Sacramento atheist Michael Newdow had no standing to bring the legal action.
Newdow objected to the words "under God" in the pledge.
Newdow brought the second case to the federal court -- this time, representing unidentified parents and their children.
Wednesday's decision sets up another constitutional showdown over the pledge.
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.
