Once again, the Freedom from Religion Foundation (FFRF) challenged the constitutionality of the Pledge of Allegiance in New Hampshire public schools.
According to the law, the New Hampshire School Patriot Act, students are permitted to voluntarily recite the Pledge in school.
The law doesn't set well with the FFRF, and they claimed that the recitation of the pledge in N.H. public schools violates the Establishment Clause, Free Exercise Clause, Equal Protection Clause, and Due Process Clause of the Constitution as well as the New Hampshire Constitution and federal and state law. Whew! With all those possibilities, remote as they are, FFRF must have figured something just might stick.
Background
After a federal district court upheld the constitutionality of the state law, the FFRF appealed to the First Circuit.
Wouldn't it be a pity if "Under God" was considered a prayer in the Pledge of Allegiance and that it, too, was eliminated from schools.
Red Skelton's Pledge of Allegiance
In its decision just last November, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit upheld the constitutionality of the Pledge stating:
"It takes more than the presence of words with religious content to have the effect of advancing religion, let alone to do so as a primary effect."
The appeals court also rejected claims that the recitation of the Pledge is an endorsement of religion:
"The Pledge's affirmation that ours is a 'nation, under God' is not a mere reference to the fact that many Americans believe in a deity, nor to the undeniable historical significance of religion in the founding of our nation. As the Supreme Court recognized in West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943), to recite the Pledge is to 'declare a belief' and 'affirm[] . . . an attitude of mind.' Id. at 631, 633. In reciting the Pledge, a student affirms a belief in its description of the nation."
"We hold that the New Hampshire School Patriot Act and the voluntary, teacher-led recitation of the Pledge by the state's public school students do not violate the Constitution. We affirm the order and judgment of the district court dismissing FFRF's complaint."
After the court dismissed the complaint, FFRF asked them to please reconsider and come to a different conclusion, one based on their distorted view of the Constitution. The appeals court rejected the request.
The ruling:
Opinion, FFRF vs Hanover School District, click here.
ACLJ amicus brief, click here.
Chief Judge Sandra Lynch:
"In reciting the Pledge, students promise fidelity to our flag and our nation, not to any particular God, faith, or church. The New Hampshire School Patriot Act's primary effect is not the advancement of religion, but the advancement of patriotism through a pledge to the flag as a symbol of the nation."
The American Center for Law and Justice, which filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the case, praised the ruling. In the words of Jay Sekulow,
"This appeals court reached a significant and sound decision that underscores what most Americans understand -- that the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance embraces patriotism, not religion."
Michael Newdow, who represented the plaintiffs in the case, had his own statement,
"Once again, we have federal judges doing what is politically popular as opposed to upholding the Constitution." He said the case isn't about "whether you believe in God or don't believe in God. It's whether you believe in the government respecting us all equally or the government favoring your religious views."
FFRF wants the same outcome in ruling as Newdow, but they don't discount that it's about the number of believers vs non-believers as shown by Gaylor's statement:
“It shouldn’t be OK to exclude nearly a third of the state’s population in a daily school ritual that turns nonbelievers into political outsiders."
Not over yet
FFRF may go to the U.S. Supreme Court. They have 90 days to file a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari at the high court.
If they do indeed file the petition, ACLJ promises to immediately file an amicus brief asking the court not to waste judicial resources on the same flawed arguments put forth by the FFRF. ACLJ will urge the high court to keep the appeals court decision intact by rejecting the request to have the case heard yet again.
Previous similar FFRF case
This decision by the First Circuit comes just weeks after a federal district court in Wisconsin rejected another flawed legal challenge by the FFRF, one where they complained about engravings of "In God We Trust" and the Pledge of Allegiance at the Capitol Visitor Center in Washington, D.C., which is "the entrance for the thousands of tourists who visit the Capitol every day."
U.S. Sen. Jim DeMint believes the engravings are necessary because otherwise the Center failed to recognize the integral role of religion in our federal government. They would correct the historical whitewash of the original design, welcome God back into the Center, and highlight the "all important relationship between faith and freedom in America."
U.S. Rep. Steve King of Iowa added that without the engravings of "In God We Trust" and the Pledge of Allegiance, the Visitor Center would reflect an effort "to scrub references to America's Christian heritage" and to eradicate "the role of Christianity in America."
In that challenge against the engravings by FFRF, the ACLJ represented 50 members of Congress in an amicus brief asking the court to reject the suit.
A federal judge threw out the lawsuit.
-------------
Additional Source
Yakima/Washington state law: RCW 28A.230.140 says that school boards "shall cause appropriate flag exercises to be held." Student participation is voluntary.
WSSDA Terry Bergeson, state superintendent of public instruction: "Our mission in school is to help build citizens for the future, and the pledge is at the heart of citizenship. It is a statement of support for the ideals of this country."
SOURCE http://www.examiner.com/article/atheist-group-takes-shot-at-pledge-of-allegiance-and-loses-again
According to the law, the New Hampshire School Patriot Act, students are permitted to voluntarily recite the Pledge in school.
The law doesn't set well with the FFRF, and they claimed that the recitation of the pledge in N.H. public schools violates the Establishment Clause, Free Exercise Clause, Equal Protection Clause, and Due Process Clause of the Constitution as well as the New Hampshire Constitution and federal and state law. Whew! With all those possibilities, remote as they are, FFRF must have figured something just might stick.
Background
After a federal district court upheld the constitutionality of the state law, the FFRF appealed to the First Circuit.
Wouldn't it be a pity if "Under God" was considered a prayer in the Pledge of Allegiance and that it, too, was eliminated from schools.
Red Skelton's Pledge of Allegiance
In its decision just last November, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit upheld the constitutionality of the Pledge stating:
"It takes more than the presence of words with religious content to have the effect of advancing religion, let alone to do so as a primary effect."
The appeals court also rejected claims that the recitation of the Pledge is an endorsement of religion:
"The Pledge's affirmation that ours is a 'nation, under God' is not a mere reference to the fact that many Americans believe in a deity, nor to the undeniable historical significance of religion in the founding of our nation. As the Supreme Court recognized in West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943), to recite the Pledge is to 'declare a belief' and 'affirm[] . . . an attitude of mind.' Id. at 631, 633. In reciting the Pledge, a student affirms a belief in its description of the nation."
"We hold that the New Hampshire School Patriot Act and the voluntary, teacher-led recitation of the Pledge by the state's public school students do not violate the Constitution. We affirm the order and judgment of the district court dismissing FFRF's complaint."
After the court dismissed the complaint, FFRF asked them to please reconsider and come to a different conclusion, one based on their distorted view of the Constitution. The appeals court rejected the request.
The ruling:
Opinion, FFRF vs Hanover School District, click here.
ACLJ amicus brief, click here.
Chief Judge Sandra Lynch:
"In reciting the Pledge, students promise fidelity to our flag and our nation, not to any particular God, faith, or church. The New Hampshire School Patriot Act's primary effect is not the advancement of religion, but the advancement of patriotism through a pledge to the flag as a symbol of the nation."
The American Center for Law and Justice, which filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the case, praised the ruling. In the words of Jay Sekulow,
"This appeals court reached a significant and sound decision that underscores what most Americans understand -- that the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance embraces patriotism, not religion."
Michael Newdow, who represented the plaintiffs in the case, had his own statement,
"Once again, we have federal judges doing what is politically popular as opposed to upholding the Constitution." He said the case isn't about "whether you believe in God or don't believe in God. It's whether you believe in the government respecting us all equally or the government favoring your religious views."
FFRF wants the same outcome in ruling as Newdow, but they don't discount that it's about the number of believers vs non-believers as shown by Gaylor's statement:
“It shouldn’t be OK to exclude nearly a third of the state’s population in a daily school ritual that turns nonbelievers into political outsiders."
Not over yet
FFRF may go to the U.S. Supreme Court. They have 90 days to file a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari at the high court.
If they do indeed file the petition, ACLJ promises to immediately file an amicus brief asking the court not to waste judicial resources on the same flawed arguments put forth by the FFRF. ACLJ will urge the high court to keep the appeals court decision intact by rejecting the request to have the case heard yet again.
Previous similar FFRF case
This decision by the First Circuit comes just weeks after a federal district court in Wisconsin rejected another flawed legal challenge by the FFRF, one where they complained about engravings of "In God We Trust" and the Pledge of Allegiance at the Capitol Visitor Center in Washington, D.C., which is "the entrance for the thousands of tourists who visit the Capitol every day."
U.S. Sen. Jim DeMint believes the engravings are necessary because otherwise the Center failed to recognize the integral role of religion in our federal government. They would correct the historical whitewash of the original design, welcome God back into the Center, and highlight the "all important relationship between faith and freedom in America."
U.S. Rep. Steve King of Iowa added that without the engravings of "In God We Trust" and the Pledge of Allegiance, the Visitor Center would reflect an effort "to scrub references to America's Christian heritage" and to eradicate "the role of Christianity in America."
In that challenge against the engravings by FFRF, the ACLJ represented 50 members of Congress in an amicus brief asking the court to reject the suit.
A federal judge threw out the lawsuit.
-------------
Additional Source
Yakima/Washington state law: RCW 28A.230.140 says that school boards "shall cause appropriate flag exercises to be held." Student participation is voluntary.
WSSDA Terry Bergeson, state superintendent of public instruction: "Our mission in school is to help build citizens for the future, and the pledge is at the heart of citizenship. It is a statement of support for the ideals of this country."
SOURCE http://www.examiner.com/article/atheist-group-takes-shot-at-pledge-of-allegiance-and-loses-again
No comments:
Post a Comment