Judge rules pledge law violates Constitution

Miami Herald ^ | 6/2/2006 | Rani Cupta

[FerdieMurphy]

A federal judge has declared a state law requiring students to stand and recite the Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional.

U.S. District Judge Kenneth Ryskamp also declared students do not need a parent's permission to be excused from reciting the pledge, citing previous federal cases.

''It is a long-standing rule of constitutional law that a student may remain quietly seated during the pledge on grounds of personal or political belief,'' Ryskamp stated in his ruling based on a lawsuit filed by a Boynton Beach High School student who had refused to stand for the pledge.

Cameron Frazier, then a 17-year-old junior, was told by teacher Cynthia Alexandre that he was ''so ungrateful and so un-American'' after he twice refused to stand for the pledge in her classroom on Nov. 8, the lawsuit said.

Frazier's lawsuit did not challenge the recital of the pledge in Florida classrooms, only students' right not to participate.

Requiring Frazier to stand during the Pledge of Allegiance is ''in violation of his First and Fourth Amendment rights,'' the lawsuit said.

In February, the School Board voted to settle and agreed to pay Frazier $32,500.

`ABOUT FREEDOM'

But the American Civil Liberties Union sued the state Board of Education and state Education Commissioner John Winn, challenging a state law that says the pledge needs to be recited at the beginning of the day at all elementary, middle and high schools.

''This is a decision about freedom and freedom in America means your right to not recite the Pledge of Allegiance or your right to recite the Pledge of Allegiance,'' said Howard Simon, executive director of the Florida ACLU. ``The impact that we hope this decision will have is that school officials begin to respect the conscience and dignity of young people.''

The Pledge of Allegiance is recited every morning at all Miami-Dade County elementary and secondary schools.

However, students have a choice. They can stand or sit in silence if they choose not to recite it for religious or personal convictions, said Joseph Garcia, a spokesman for Miami Dade Public Schools.

''We prefer notes from parents,'' he said. ``But we will not discipline a child for not reciting it as long as they are not being disruptive.''

Broward County also offers its students the option of participating -- or not.

''The policy in Broward is we request students to say the pledge,'' said district spokesman Keith Bromery. ``If a student does not want to do it, all they are required to do is sit or stand quietly and not disrupt other students.''

Learning how to recite the Pledge of Allegiance is part of the Miami-Dade curriculum, Garcia said.

He added there have not been any problems with the School Board ruling in recent years.

''Our ruling conforms with federal and state statutes,'' Garcia said. ``[The Pledge of Allegiance] is going to be said in our school. Whether a student says it or not is a matter of the student's personal or religious conviction.''

`DISAPPOINTED'

Simon said that was in line with what the Supreme Court ruled in 1943.

''The Supreme Court ruled that a person can't be compelled to professing allegiance,'' he said. ``Their rule respects the right of the student.''

State Department of Education spokeswoman Cathy Schroeder said the department was ''disappointed'' with Ryskamp's decision and may appeal.

''Our attorneys are reviewing the ruling to see if any further action can be taken,'' Schroeder said.

[ZULU]

I think you have no understanding of the Constitution.

If the First Amendment prevents the state from forcing Americans to take a pledge of allegiance to the United States, why do we require newly naturalized citizens to do so?

The First Amendment exists to protect political speech. People can discuss anything political they wish. The Founding Fathers obviously thought Americans would use common sense in applying the Constitution. We, through our courts, have just as obviously lost that capability.

If somebody like a Quaker or Jehovah's witness has a religious requirement against taking the pledge of allegiance, that is one thing. The actions of this little brat and his family are an entirely different situation.

But people who simply refuse to pledge allegiance to America are simply not Americans, don't deserve any protection under our Constitution and don't belong here.
I think an analogy between the United States or most other nations requiring their citizens to pledge allegiance to the nation to which they claim to belong and NAZI Germany is so absurb as to not even merit a response.

You can't belong to a club without agreeing to follow the club's rules, and the Pledge of Allegiance is, in essence, an oath to adhere to the rules of the United States and its Constitution.

[From many - one.]

In order to become citizens we can require anything we want, including balancing a banana on their nose.

There is a major difference between the feeling we had when I was a kid and the feelings I see now. Yes, I used the dread word "feeling" to describe the impact of the Pledge of Allegiance when I was a kid. A real upwelling of patriotic fervor. I don't need it to be diluted by forcing kids to participate. Now, as then, failure to participate ends up having to be explained and that is all that is necessary.

Pledging Allegiance at the point of a (figurative) gun is intimidation.

[ZULU]

"A real upwelling of patriotic fervor. I don't need it to be diluted by forcing kids to participate."

I guess we disagree. My patriotism hasn't "evolved" in light of recent insane court decisions that are grounded on personal feelings rather than Constituional law.

And you might feel differently about this when the millions of illegals Bush is trying to import bring their kids with them who consider themselves Mexicans living in America, won't pledge allegiance to our flag, but will remain in our country - a ticking time bomb waiting to explode into another "Reconquista" of the southwest.

If somebody refuses to pledge allegiance to America - they aren't American and they don't belong here.

[From many - one.]

Um-m. Re-read my post.

Any illegals here can pledge all they want. I want them o-u-t. Period.


And my post did not challenge the right to require a pledge of allegiance, however worded, to the country LEGAL immigrants aspire to become citizens of.

Now that I think about it, the idea of illegals "pledging" wholesale to either my flag or my country makes me sick.

[Sloth]

It appears you were wrong.

[FerdieMurphy]

I think very little of governments who place their women in combat situations!

Countries that do this aren't worth defending and won't be around very long.

[FerdieMurphy]

Good one, CAP!!!!

[FerdieMurphy]

The ACLU is a subversive organization that should be condemned by all decent citizens.

[From many - one.]

Doesn't Israel?

Sort of depends, in my opinion, on whether the combat is on home ground or elsewhere

[Vineyard]

Actually - there have been a variety of contradictory rulings by states and Federal judges, so some clarification is needed.

I personally believe (and IIRC - a state judge ruled favorably) that a state can mandate that a teacher lead a flag pledge. Also - students have the right to not participate (i.e. - they don't have to recite the pledge), but they can be compelled to stand and show respect - even if they disagree with the pledge.
This is consistent with the fact that kids are mandated to be in the classroom, while the teacher can be compelled to perform the function as a condition of employment. The teacher can go teach elsewhere if the rule bothers them.

I merely mentioned that some judges would give students the ability to be disrespectful to the flag in a classroom, but would go totally bonkers if someone showed the judge that same level of disrespect in the courtroom. Hypocritical to have higher standards for a judge than for the symbol of the country.

I didn't comment on requiring a kid to recite the pledge - and as noted above, I don't have a problem with a kid being allowed to remain silent, but still requiring the kid to stand in silent respect during a ceremony such as reciting the pledge of allegience.

Mike

[Crispus Attucks Patriot]

Why?

Don't'chu know that saggin'is haute couture these days?????

;-)

[Bob J]

"Despite my opposition to forcing (see post 26) I stood and recited the pledge proudly and daily when I was in school."

So did I, I just didn't know what I was doing.

[Bob J]

You can't compare adults standing for a judge in a courtroom and kids being forced to recite a pledge before school. 2 different things.

[drlevy88]

If memory serves, what we know as the Pledge, sans the "under God", was penned by a socialist.

[ZULU]

SO WHAT!

Did you ever read it? Does it sound "Socialist" to you?

[drlevy88]

The author didn't want the country to think like "I'm an Illinoian," "I'm a Floridian," "I'm a Kentuckian" etc. Too much independence in those pesky states. No, in order to socialist-ize a country, you first have to get it to think as one. Consider how often, during the heyday of the USSR, you heard in the news about Mr. X from Belorussia and Mr. Y from the Ukraine etc. No, it was Mr. X and Mr. Y from the USSR.

[ZULU]

You're absolutely right.

The Pledge of Allegiance is a socialist instrument and people should be pledging allegiance to their states instead of a centralized, imperial Federal government.

[Little Ray]

They should allow people to not stand for the pledge.

If you're a kid, remember those kids who don't stand when you go to the lunch room, or to the play ground, and after school.

If you're an adult, remember those adults and/or their children who don't stand when you do business or socialize.

And remember this judge, and whoever appointed him next time you vote.

[Rapscallion]

This judge, U.S. District Judge Kenneth Ryskamp, needs to be impeached. Where in the US Constitution does it say you cannot require the pledge to be recited by those we are educating?