Fox News Just Said Federal Judge says Pledge "Un-Constitutional"

[nov7freedomday]

Just heard on top of the hour on Fox News Radio

[hawkaw]

I believe the JWs one a round on that issue too many years ago so that they don't have to pledge alligence to the flag.

[hawkaw]

I believe the JWs won a round on that issue too many years ago so that they don't have to pledge alligence to the flag.

[Smartass]

More info...

 

 

Judge: School Pledge Is Unconstitutional Sep 14 2:39 PM US/Eastern

By DAVID KRAVETS
Associated Press Writer

SAN FRANCISCO

Reciting the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools was declared unconstitutional Wednesday by a federal judge ruling in the second attempt by an atheist to have the pledge removed from classrooms. The man lost his previous battle before the U.S. Supreme Court

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 was bound by precedent of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which in 2002 ruled in favor of Sacramento atheist Michael Newdow that the pledge is unconstitutional when recited in public schools.

The Supreme Court dismissed the case last year, saying Newdow lacked standing because he did not have custody of his elementary school daughter he sued on behalf of.

Newdow, an attorney and a medical doctor, filed an identical case on behalf of three unnamed parents and their children. Karlton said those families have the right to sue.

Karlton, ruling in Sacramento, said he would sign a restraining order preventing the recitation of the pledge at the Elk Grove Unified, Rio Linda and Elverta Joint Elementary school districts, where the plaintiffs' children attend.

The decision sets up another showdown over the pledge in schools.

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.

"It's a way to get this issue to the Supreme Court for a final decision to be made," said fund attorney Jared Leland.

Newdow, reached at his home, was not immediately prepared to comment.

[FloridianBushFan]

I thought they ruled that the case to be thrown out completely because Michael Newdow had no legal standing for bringing the case forward since he was not the legal guardian of his daughter.

If that is the case and it was thrown out completely then the the 9th Circuit ruling would not stand since there was no legal grounds for the case. The schools went back to allowing the pledge to be said which would mean that the 9th circuit ruling was thrower out also and that means there is no precedent.

Correct me if I wrong, but that is the way I understood it at the time.

[Redbob]

From his picture, Judge Karlton looks like he might best be described as a "pompous ass."

What think you?

[hawkaw]

I believe the JWs won a round on that issue too many years ago so that they don't have to pledge allegiance to the flag.

[SE Mom]

Welcome to Free Republic. Would you like to remove THESE words as well?

"When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation."

[Explodo]

Wouldn't Atheism be a religion? And would this be the state Promoting a Atheistic religion as a state religion? Atheists have to make the same "Leap of faith" that believers do...yet they are free and clear to promote their religion over those that make a "leap of Faith" that a Higher Power Exists....

What kind of Communist Double speak is that.

[Littlejon]

Well, I am not a lawyer (Thank goodness!), but finding grounds to sue someone doesn't seem to stop the ACLU, so why shoudl WE play by the rules?

Of course, I am just kidding with all of this, but it would be nice if some lawyer or group could find a way to tie the ACLU up in court like they do so many companies & groups. Just wishful thinking, I guess.

[Redbob]

"It's time to cut this nonsense out. California is part of this country. Wishing destruction on it is just not right."

No need to wish destruction on California - Cali's are bringing it on themselves.

[Black Tooth]

"Come on earthquake!!"

Hey....there ya go. Some judge makes a ruling you don't like, so you think all of the good citizens in CA should die. Very odd.

Don't worry about these weirdos. They'd be the same ones screaming the loudest, and calling for you to be banned if you wished for hurricanes, ice storms, floods or tornado's on them, if some politician or judge did something you didn't like.

It's really pathetic that their burning jealousy of California would drive them to call for the deaths of innocent, good people.

See my tagline.

[ConsentofGoverned]

"I'm waiting for some judge to determine that the constitution is un-constitutional. Should be any day now."

sorry you didn't notice - the constitution is a living document which means it is what ever the Judge thinks it means - so yes there is NO such thing as a Constitution with one meaning- the Leftist liberal Judges have thrown out the founding documents for a constantly changing book of law..a disgrace and a threat to our freedom..good example the eminent domain case in New London..no more private property..the Kingdom of Judges is upon us all.

[Myrddin]

If Congress repealed USC Section 1988 that requires taxpayers to pay attorneys in civil rights cases, the pot of money that drives the ACLU lawyers would dry up. They would have to pursue the cases on principle and at their own expense. The ACLU lacks principles. They pursue civil rights cases to line their pockets.

[BlackRain]

Who is Judge Lawrence K. Karlton?

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.

Education:

Columbia Law School, J.D., 1958

Professional Career:

1958-1960
U.S. Army

1960-1962
Civilian legal officer, Sacramento Army Depot

1962-1976
Private practice, Sacramento, California

1976-1979
Judge, Superior Court of California, Sacramento County

[Lurking in Kansas]

See my post # 87.

Oops, missed your post. LOL, great minds think alike!!

[SE Mom]

Here's what I found from AP (David Kravets writer)
SAN FRANCISCO - Reciting the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools was ruled unconstitutional Wednesday by a federal judge who granted legal standing to two families represented by an atheist who lost his previous battle before the U.S. Supreme Court

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 was bound by precedent of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which in 2002 ruled in favor of Sacramento atheist Michael Newdow that the pledge is unconstitutional when recited in public schools.

[Borges]

You think the State should regulate 'fornication'?

[cake_crumb]

"There's no record of that section being discussed by the Convention. It's believed to have been added by a scribe, after the fact."

It was the accepted way of formally recording a date up until the middle of the 20th century. It wouldn't have BEEN discussed, it simply would have been done.

[Lester Moore]

I wouldn't mind it being trimmed BACK to what it was, originally.

Does that include back to the original hand/arm motions?

It didn't start with the hand-over-the-heart.