Posted on 07/18/2005 1:20:40 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
SACRAMENTO (AP) - A federal judge said Monday he is inclined to dismiss part of a lawsuit brought by a Sacramento atheist who claims the Pledge of Allegiance is an unconstitutional endorsement of religion.
U.S. District Judge Lawrence Karlton said he would allow Michael Newdow, a doctor and lawyer, to sue four Sacramento-area school districts where children he is representing attend and recite the pledge. The judge said Newdow could not challenge the pledge itself and the words "under God," which Congress inserted in 1954.
"What I'm doing is cutting out a whole lot of your case and making it narrow," Karlton said during the first hearing on the lawsuit, which is the second over the pledge brought by Newdow.
The U.S. Supreme Court dismissed his first case last year, saying Newdow lacked standing to bring it on behalf of his elementary-aged daughter because he did not have custody of her.
If the judge stands by his comments Monday, Newdow's latest lawsuit would focus strictly on whether reciting the pledge in public schools is an unconstitutional endorsement of religion. Even if Newdow were to win on that point, the pledge itself would remain intact.
The judge said Newdow may have a valid point.
"There is nothing whatsoever that requires acknowledging God to love this country," Karlton said.
Terence Cassidy, a lawyer for the Elk Grove Unified School District, urged Karlton to dismiss the case. He said reciting the pledge in school was not about religion, but rather is designed "to teach children about patriotism."
Newdow's lawsuit was filed against the school districts, the state and Congress and seeks to have the entire pledge declared unconstitutional.
After Monday's hearing, he appeared unmoved by the judge's expected narrowing of the lawsuit. He said any decision was likely to be appealed.
Newdow won his initial case more than two years ago before a San Francisco federal appeals court. That court said it was an unconstitutional blending of church and state for public school students to pledge to God.
The U.S. Supreme Court rejected the case in June 2004, saying Newdow could not lawfully sue because he did not have custody of his daughter and because the girl's mother objected to the lawsuit. Newdow and the mother were never married.
Eight co-plaintiffs have joined the latest lawsuit, all of whom are children or custodial parents who have filed the suit on behalf of their children, Newdow said. The plaintiffs' names have been withheld from the suit for fear of physical harm.
"We're a despised minority," Newdow told the judge.
When the Supreme Court dismissed his previous case, three justices - Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and justices Sandra Day O'Connor and Clarence Thomas - made clear they would have upheld the religious reference Congress inserted into the pledge in 1954. A fourth justice, Antonin Scalia, removed himself from the case after making off-the-bench remarks that seemed to telegraph his view that the pledge is constitutional.
Karlton did not indicate when he would issue a written ruling.
The case is Newdow v. Congress, 05-00017.
I wonder why? ;-)
Of course they never married. Newdow is Gay.
That would explain a lot. You are joking though, right?
(steely)
Next time a liberal asks "why are people wasting time banning same-sex marriage when there are so many other pressing problems in our country?" ask the same thing back about this.
Never met an Atheist or an Agnostic in the foxhole or at a disaster scene. Says a lot about Nedow the first he can control but his attitude proves he doesn't have the stomach to defend the freedoms he so enjoys abusing and the later will eventually come to him. The laws of mathematical probability say so.
I still say he has no standing in this case. He doesn't have custody of the girls, and she is a practicing Christian who prays and attends church according to her mother.
I wonder who he thanked when his daughter was born with 10 toes, 10 fingers, and healthy? a tree?
The ability of folks like him to deny their core beginnings whether they like it or not is troubling. It isn't born of ignorance , more arrogance.
Newdow, God's gonna get ya for that.. unless a tree gets him first. stranger things have happened. ;-)
Honest opinion, do you think he has a shot at winning this?
You are a despised minority, because of the fact that despite your minority status, you and your allies and associates have created a secularist and atheist religion of the state, which by the way violates the First Amendment, and have forced it upon every man, woman, and child in America.
The Founding Fathers would be astounded by this development.
Someone needs to write a book about this.
Anyone who denies the existence of a Creator also denies that the basic human rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, as well as freedom and democracy, are God-given rights.
Secularists believe that these are Government-given rights, for Government is "god." Nancy Pelosi herself says that when the Supreme Court speaks, it is as if God is speaking.
If man created government, and Government is "god," then in theory man can take away these rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. They are then not "rights" at all, they are privledges, not given to us because God has given them to every person who is born on this earth, but because someone decides who gets to be "free" and who doesn't. That's a very dangerous path.
Now if you choose to claim that you and your group are outside my experiences OK. That still doesn't change the statement of my personal observations.
As we all know there are always exceptions to the general rule.
Senior District Court Judge Lawrence K. Karlton (LKK)
Born 1935 in Brooklyn, NY
Federal Judicial Service:
U. S. District Court, Eastern District of California
Nominated by Jimmy Carter on June 5, 1979, to a seat vacated by Thomas J. MacBride; Confirmed by the Senate on July 23, 1979, and received commission on July 24, 1979. Served as chief judge, 1983-1990. Assumed senior status on May 28, 2000.
http://207.41.18.73/caed/staticOther/page_516.htm
I wonder what Jimmy Carter thinks -- with all his fault, he is deeply religious.
I'll go ya one better. I have asked to have the post by the freethinker deleted .
I won't see my threads used to recruit for the ACLU and People of the American Way, amongst other orgs..
They don't like it, tough.
They can ask God to intervene on their behalf.
Just curious.
Do you support or oppose military recruiters being allowed to recruit on college or high school campuses?
That description, Mr. Newdow, is not what I would deem appropriate. Satan's minions is a more correct revelation.
Some do; some do not. And there are some Christians who believe that government should act directly as an agent of God by enforcing all Biblical law.
The pledge is working marvelously at finding the godless commies in our midst I tell ya .
I may be changing my mind about having it yanked, and I'm not even a female. lol ;-)
I have been strategerizing how to make hay out a plea to check out the godless that serve in the military and who they pray to in combat.
Altho I would still like to know if qam1 supports military recruiters on college and high school campuses, being as a number of the contributors sites for MAAF are those very same fighting a battle to keep recruiters off of campuses.. Ironic, No?
Thanks!
Developing.. :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.