Posted on 06/14/2004 7:25:52 AM PDT by I still care
Just a breaking news bar - the court has thrown out Newdows case on a technicality. Score one for the pledge.
Hooray!!!
In God we trust!
One nation under God,
He doesn't have legal custody therefore can not bring a case forward on her behalf...
**They should just disband the 9th**
I'll second that!
What a horrible indictment of our legal system. An issue that should be determined at the lowest court has to be adjudicated at the nation's highest court.
"The Newsdows case was thrown out on Flag Day. Who says the USSC isn't subtle."
I'll stip to that, Buck, and even go as far as saying the Supremes exceeded jurisdiction in Bush v. Gore, based on a very strained opinion, in order to correct the lame-brained (in my opinion) ruling of the Florida Supremes. Guess it depends on whether you agree that ends justify means. Twas ever thus.
P.S. Your rhetoric didn't phase me, but probably in your own best interests you might want to get out and get some exercise and fresh air! Too much time on these boards can make a person very shrill.
Bump!
By failing to rule on the merits, the SCOTUS keeps the issue alive; by keeping it alive, it plays into the hands of Republicans for the rest of the election cyle. Most people support "under god" in the pledge. This is good news.
Wonderful. I'll take this is a victory even if others won't.
Ronald Reagan: "If we ever forget that we are One Nation Under God, then we will be a Nation gone under."
Excellent!!!!!
I'm with you. God works in mysterious ways, and who are we to judge the reason why in this case. I am just glad it has happened.
ALLLLL RIGHT!!!!
You are right, this has been an issue from the beginning, but of course the 9th circuit would not acknowledge it because they wanted to once again use their courtroom to make a partisan political statement which they knew would be overturned. I'm just glad that Newdow and his backers have wasted so much money.
...unless of course, one is:
a slave in a slave state
-or-
a perhaps viable, yet still developing human being under the stewardship of one's mother....
Maybe we could start charging the 9th circuit for all the court time that they waste on cases which get overturned.
.
And tomorrow is D-Day for the Los Angeles Board of Supervisors -
GOD stays in our Pledge of Allegiance, the Cross must stay on the Los Angeles City Seal or the City's very ANGELS name will also Fall.
The Enemy is now Within...
and always has been.
.
The drug-addicts and the Cross-breaking Christophobes really aren't going to like this at all, and thank goodness. Good to see the Supreme Court actually show some sense once in a while.
The question is how did the case get this far in the first place if it was thrown out on such a clear technicality?
A Unanimous Supreme Court Vacates Ninth Circuit Court Of Appeals Decision Striking Down “Under God” In The Pledge Of Allegiance
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, the United States Supreme Court held, in a unanimous decision, that Michael Newdow, an atheist from California who had challenged the constitutionality of the words “Under God” in the pledge of allegiance, did not have standing to bring his case. The legal effect of the Supreme Court’s ruling is to vacate the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision that struck the words “Under God” from the pledge. Liberty Counsel, a nationwide civil liberties legal defense and education organization headquartered in Orlando, Florida, filed an Amicus Brief at the United States Supreme Court in the case.
The Supreme Court decision held that Michael Newdow lacked standing to bring his case because he did not have the legal authority to speak on behalf of his daughter. Mr. Newdow is currently involved in a custody battle with his ex-wife. Justices Rehnquist, Thomas and O’Connor issued a concurring opinion agreeing that Mr. Newdow lacked standing, but also arguing that the phrase “Under God” in the pledge is constitutional.
The legal effect of the Supreme Court’s ruling is to vacate the Ninth Circuit’s earlier decision holding the pledge to be unconstitutional. After today’s ruling, it is as if Mr. Newdow had never brought his case in the courts. Prior to today’s ruling by the Supreme Court, schoolchildren in states covered by the Ninth Circuit (Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon and Washington) were barred from saying the pledge of allegiance with the inclusion of the phrase “Under God.” Now, there is no prohibition against saying the entire pledge in those states.
Mathew Staver, President and General Counsel of Liberty Counsel, stated, “We are pleased that the effect of the Supreme Court’s decision is to uphold the constitutionality of the pledge of allegiance. Schoolchildren in states covered by the Ninth Circuit can now say the entire pledge of allegiance without fear of censorship.” Staver continued, “Justices Rehnquist, Thomas and O’Connor are correct that the pledge of allegiance is constitutional. Our history is not complete without God. If “under God” were removed, many history books and founding documents will be in jeopardy, not the least of which is the Declaration of Independence.”
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.