Skip to comments.
9TH CIRCUIT COURT: PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL
Fox News ^
Posted on 06/26/2002 11:25:21 AM PDT by Recovering_Democrat
UNBELIEVABLE. BREAKING ON FOX: SF APPEALS COURT SAYS PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ENDORSES RELIGION, AND IS THEREBY UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
TOPICS: Announcements; Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; US: Alaska; US: Arizona; US: California; US: Hawaii; US: Idaho; US: Montana; US: Nevada; US: Oregon; US: Washington
KEYWORDS: 9thcircuitcourt; michaeldobbs; pledgeofallegiance; unconstitutional
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 ... 1,461-1,477 next last
To: WellsFargo94
whatever happened to freedom of worship? Freedom of worship is the point. What if you worship Krishna? Or noone?
61
posted on
06/26/2002 11:38:08 AM PDT
by
mlo
To: Recovering_Democrat
Decision
[10] In conclusion, we hold that (1) the 1954 Act adding the words under God to the Pledge, and (2) EGUSDs pol-icy and practice of teacher-led recitation of the Pledge, with the added words included, violate the Establishment Clause. The judgment of dismissal is vacated with respect to these two claims, and the cause is remanded for further proceedings consistent with our holding. Plaintiff is to recover costs on this appeal. REVERSED AND REMANDED.
9131 NEWDOW v. U.S. CONGRESS
62
posted on
06/26/2002 11:38:23 AM PDT
by
deport
To: cracker
Exactly. A tempest in a teapot. We recited - "one nation, indivisible", -- all through WWII, & Korea, and it served the purpose just fine.
Anyone know why it was changed?
63
posted on
06/26/2002 11:38:24 AM PDT
by
tpaine
To: Dimensio
no one is denying the history. take a hike, clown.
To: Hacksaw
SAN FRANCISCO: three-judge panel. -AP Breaking News (06-26) 11:36 PDT (AP) -- The court, in the nation's first ruling of its kind, said that when President Eisenhower signed the 1954 legislation, he wrote that "millions of our schoolchildren will daily proclaim in every city and town...
To: Recovering_Democrat
Kookifornia. THAT figures!
66
posted on
06/26/2002 11:38:38 AM PDT
by
SheLion
Comment #67 Removed by Moderator
To: Recovering_Democrat
Several more candidates have made themselves visible for their turn in the Navy lockup down in Charleston.
They were long black night dresses.
Time to round'em up.
68
posted on
06/26/2002 11:39:06 AM PDT
by
muawiyah
To: Recovering_Democrat
We are lost!
To: FreedomFarmer
Pardon me, but I think I will use Thomas Jefferson's words.
[The Charters of Freedom]
The Declaration of Independence: A Transcription
IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,
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.
To: Recovering_Democrat
Not enough bad stuff can happen to these people.
To: CecilRhodesGhost
Congress should restore the pledge of allegiance to its original form.
To: spectre
It should be overturned by the Supreme Court.."In God WE Trust"...sw
will they take In God WE Trust off of America Money
To: Recovering_Democrat
Rush is playing Red Skelton's Pledge of Allegiance. Listen to the very last line, where he says, "Wouldn't it be sad if someone decided "under God" is a prayer and they take the Pledge out of school?
You need Real Player to listen. You can listen to Red's pledge by clicking below.
http://www.mindspring.com/~pol ysne/ra/rspledge.ram
To: beowolf
It really is stunning.
PUSH FOR BUSH JUDICIAL NOMINEES
To: Recovering_Democrat
"It is the sacred principles enshrined in the UN Charter to which we will
henceforth pledge our allegiance."
--George Bush addressing the world leaders at the UN.
To: wimpycat
This can go to the Supreme Court, can't it? There's a level of review (sort of) between the Supreme Court and the 9th Circuit.
It's called an en banc review and is basically a request for the entire federal appeals court to decide the issue instead of just a three-judge panel of the court.
(Disclaimer/clarification - My understanding is that the Ninth Circuit, unlike other circuits, has so many judges (30+) that a review by *all* of the justices is nearly impossible because of the size the courtroom would have to be. But they still do en banc reviews).
Anyhow, it will most likely be overturned en banc and the Supreme Court will deny cert (refuse to hear the case - leaving the last ruling in effect).
77
posted on
06/26/2002 11:40:23 AM PDT
by
gdani
To: Recovering_Democrat
FREEDOM OF RELIGION, NOT FREEDOM FROM RELIGION. FREEDOM OF RELIGION NOT FREEDOM FROM RELIGION. FREEDOM OF RELIGION NOT FREEDOM FROM RELIGION.
To: Lazamataz
I think the "one nation under God" part was added to the pledge when Ike was president, correct? I forgot.
To: Recovering_Democrat
This is a sick joke right?
80
posted on
06/26/2002 11:41:18 AM PDT
by
swheats
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 ... 1,461-1,477 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson