Judge blocks mandatory Colorado pledge law

Casper Star-Tribune/AP ^ | 8/15/03 | STEVEN K. PAULSON

[DPB101]

Calling it divisive and discriminatory, a federal judge blocked a Colorado law Friday that requires public school students and teachers to recite the Pledge of Allegiance.

In issuing a temporary injunction, U.S. District Judge Lewis Babcock said the law discriminates against teachers by allowing students to opt out with a note from their parents. Teachers have no such option.

The judge also said the law pits students who choose to say the pledge against those who do not, and students against teachers.

''What is instructional about that? Isn't that compelled speech? To mandate every day that one make this pledge whether you believe it or not?'' Babcock asked. ''You can't compel a citizen of the United States to recite the Pledge of Allegiance.''

The injunction will be in effect until a full hearing on the challenge. A date for that hearing was not set.

The pledge has long been part of the routine in many Colorado schools but it was not required for all 750,000 public school students from kindergarten to 12th grade until the law took effect Aug. 6.

The law was challenged less than a week later by the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of nine teachers and students from four Denver-area districts.

Anne Rosenblatt, a 14-year-old freshman at Cherry Creek High School and one of those who challenged the law, said she has refused to say the pledge since January.

''I don't believe in pledging my allegiance to an inanimate object,'' she said after the ruling. Her father, Richard, said he respected her rights.

Rick Kaufman, a spokesman for Jefferson County schools, said the injunction would not stop school officials from saying the pledge daily. He said principals were advised even before the court case not to discipline anyone for refusing to say the pledge, regardless of their reasons.

''We do look forward to this litigation,'' Kaufman said. ''It will help clear up any further direction for school districts with respect to the mandate of the state law.''

State Senate President John Andrews, R-Centennial, said the ruling was an insult.

''This is a gross insult to the patriotism of most Coloradans. It's bad jurisprudence. I'm confident it will be overturned on appeal,'' he said.

ACLU attorney Allen Chen told the judge the law posed irreparable harm to the First Amendment rights of students and teachers.

''This is nothing less than ritualistic recitation of words that have much meaning to some people and no meaning to other people,'' he said.

State officials say anyone can choose not to say the pledge under certain circumstances. Assistant Deputy Attorney General Maurice Knaizer said the pledge requirement was just part of a state-mandated curriculum.

''I don't think there's any argument that the education of children is an important state objective,'' he told the judge.

Colorado is one of 33 states that require students to recite the pledge during the school day, according to the Education Commission of the States. Specific rules vary.

Last month, a federal court ruled a Pennsylvania law requiring all students to recite the pledge or sing the national anthem violated students' freedom of speech under the First Amendment.

The Supreme Court is expected to announce this fall whether it will consider another federal court ruling in San Francisco that said regular classroom recitations of the pledge are unconstitutional because of the phrase ''one nation, under God.'' That case began with a lawsuit by an atheist who sued the school district where his daughter was a second-grader.

[cake_crumb]

"A new federal law ordering legal immigrants who have committed crimes to be jailed during deportation hearings has been ruled unconstitutional by U.S. District Judge Lewis Babcock . . ."

Oh good grief.

[joesnuffy]

In my 'public' grade school we started out every morning with both the pledge and the Lords Prayer
imagine that...

[goldstategop]

Lewis Babcock is an idiot. No one is compelled to attend and students can always opt out of saying the Pledge. But liberal judges like him have decided patriotic sentiment is well... unconstitutional.

[goldstategop]

''This is nothing less than ritualistic recitation of words that have much meaning to some people and no meaning to other people,'' he said.

I love this bunch of nonsense from the ACLU. If its just a bunch of empty words that have no meaning to other people, then why make a fuss over whether the Pledge is recited in Colorado classrooms? The federal judge thinks being an American is "divisive and discriminatory." Huh? I think he should be impeached and thrown off the bench but Congress is too gutless to lay down the law to our federal judiciary!

[ladylib]

You must be as old as I am. Remember Madeline Murray O'Hare?

Anyway, in the early 60's we had an atheist (a girl) in our school who had a problem with the Lord's Prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag. The administation in our school was very parent friendly and suggested that if little Danielle didn't want to say the Pledge or participate in the bible reading or the Lord's Prayer, she of course didn't have to. It wasn't made into a big deal.

The principal of the school was Catholic and the administration and school board was made up of Christians. They respected parents' rights.

[cake_crumb]

"If the state of Colorado thought that tolerating gays was a good thing, would it be a good idea to require all teachers and students to swear a pledge to say so? "

I agree about non-compunction, though no one was being compelled to say the pledge. Your analogy was a bad one, because if you exercise your First Amendment rights and say you don't like the gay lifestyle, you could lose your job or be convicted of a hate crime. In fact, anything not interpreted by whomever wants to make an issue as being anything other than loving and tolorant to their particular lifestyle, religion, gender or fetish can cost you your job or get you convicted of a hate crime. Just illustrating the flip side.

Speaking of flip sides, let's also not forget that a Federal Judge ruled that children going to school within the area of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals are compelled and coerced NOT to say the words "One Nation Under God" is they opt to say the pledge. Non-compulsively, of course.

[jwalsh07]

The judge is right. Whether the pledge is good or bad is not the question. The freedom of the citizens to accept it or not should not be a function of government.

The judge is wrong as regards the students, he is right regarding the teachers if they are indeed coerced to recite the pledge. But I doubt the state of Colorado would codify that.

Since 1943, coerced recitation of the POA has been unconstitutional.

However, even the infamous 14th Amendment does not protect against embarrassment or peer pressure. At least it didn't used to, no telling if that's one of those new transcendent liberty thingamobs or not.

[goldstategop]

Liberals consider America to be a discriminatory and divisive country. That's the way underneath all that high-falautin' minded rhetoric, these folks really think about our country, my friends. Its not a pretty sight.

[goldstategop]

Liberals are not worried about coercion. Its non issue. They're worried about our children getting the wrong idea about being an America. Liberals hate America to the root of their souls and they don't want schoolkids getting any notion its OK to actually love her.

[goldstategop]

Judges due tend to turn left on the bench. They want to be liked in the elite quarters of society. The kind that you know, look down on average Americans as something to be scrapped off their shoes. And its no wonder this liberal federal judge thinks voluntarily reciting the Pledge is well, "quaint."

[goldstategop]

Its not about coercion. Students can get a note and opt out of saying the Pledge if they're not comfortable with it. No, what bothers the ACLU is that patriotism should be in the nation's cirriculum in the first place.

[goldstategop]

Good question. Ann Coulter told y'all so. If liberals really loved this country they wouldn't be shoving their garbage in our faces.

[usadave]

Last month, a federal court ruled a Pennsylvania law requiring all students to recite the pledge or sing the national anthem violated students' freedom of speech under the First Amendment.

If all of the students in a particular classroom were required to give a verbal book report, would that violate the students' freedom of speech rights under the First Amendment?

[DPB101]

The question is if you wish to be ruled by judges or elected representatives.

[ladylib]

In Pennsylvania, they don't have to get a parent's note if they're uncomfortable with it. They can just refuse and they don't have to give a reason for doing so.

[Mushinronshasan]

No, it's not about whether the students can get a note from mom and dad. It's about whether the state can compel students to think in state approved modes. The pledge is not being prohibited, and rightly so.

[goldstategop]

Why are federal judges concerned about patriotic values? And since when do we allow judges to set the fine points of our school cirriculum? More to the point, why are federal judges acting as partisan enforcers on behalf of the liberal agenda?

[cake_crumb]

But no one was compelling anyone in Colorado to say the pledge. Heck, I went to school in PA. I never knew there was a law requiring students to say the Pledge. Those that didn't want to didn't.

[goldstategop]

The Pledge is being prohibited. If you can't say it in a classroom, where can you say it? Why not prohibit any speech in school that offends liberals on the grounds it would compel students to think in a state approved mode? After all there's some expression in school that will offend someone's parents and its not just the Pledge.

[cake_crumb]

"Its not about coercion. Students can get a note and opt out of saying the Pledge if they're not comfortable with it. No, what bothers the ACLU is that patriotism should be in the nation's cirriculum in the first place"

Right. The point is they want to force and coerce everyone into NEVER saying the Pledge, anywhere, ever.