Ninth Circuit recent ruling creates controversy, debate
Judges declare pledge unconstitutional

by Nick Nance, managing editor

    A boundary has been established separating church and state, again; this time the implications are more noticeable.

   In one of the most controversial court rulings in recent years, a federal appeals court ruled reciting the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools is an unconstitutional endorsement of religion.

   Francis Bellamy wrote the Pledge of Allegiance in 1892 for a children’s magazine. Bellamy was a preacher, teacher and editor; his visions of a middle-class utopia inspired his original pledge.

   Bellamy’s original version, however, would not have been ruled unconstitutional.

   It is the phrase “under God,” added in 1954 by congress and approved by President Dwight D. Eisenhower, that is considered a religious endorsement.

   The addition of the phrase was in response to a request from the Knights of Columbus, a religious fraternal organization.

   After the addition Eisenhower said, “From this day forward, the millions of our school children will daily proclaim in every city and town, every village and rural schoolhouse, the dedication of our Nation and our people to the Almighty.”

   The pledge was first recited in schools in commemoration of the 400 year anniversary of Christopher Columbus’ voyage to the Americas.

   In 1924 “My Flag” was changed to “the flag of the United States of America.”

   The Supreme Court held that schools could not make kids say the pledge in 1943.

   Voluntary recitation of the pledge, however, has continued since that decision.

   Citing a concurring opinion from a Supreme Court decision, the Ninth Circuit said, “The Pledge, as currently codified, is an impermissible government endorsement of religion because it sends a message to unbelievers that they are outsiders, not full members of the political community, and an accompanying message to adherents that they are insiders, favored members of the political community.”

   Michael A. Newdow, a San Francisco lawyer and physician, is the man who filed the suit.

   Newdow said his goal was simply to separate church and state, and that he will continue his efforts to do so.

   The Ninth Circuit Court, which wrote the controversial decision, has become known for its unprecedented interpretations of the law.

   The Court is considered by legal scholars to be one of the most liberal courts our nation has ever seen.

   The Ninth Circuit is also currently the most overturned court in the country.