 |
||||||||
 |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
No Pledge of Allegiance in school, Calif. court says
By MIKE BRASSFIELD
In a ruling denounced across the country, a federal appeals court Wednesday declared that reciting the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools is unconstitutional because the pledge contains the words "under God." The decision, if allowed to stand, means schoolchildren can no longer recite the pledge, at least in the nine Western states covered by the San Francisco-based appeals court. The court's ruling outraged Congress, the president, and countless public officials, ministers and veterans groups. "It's a terrible thing," said Jack Fiedler, commander of American Legion Post 14 in St. Petersburg. "What harm can the pledge do? "Under God' is not specific. It could be anybody's god." Constitutional scholars doubt the ruling will withstand a legal challenge, either in the U.S. Supreme Court or at the federal appellate level. They do not expect a nationwide ban of the Pledge of Allegiance. In a 2-1 decision, a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the reference to God, which was added to the pledge by Congress in 1954, amounts to a government endorsement of monotheism, violating the separation of church and state. Leading schoolchildren in a pledge that says the United States is "one nation under God" is as objectionable as making them say "we are a nation "under Jesus,' a nation "under Vishnu,' a nation "under Zeus,' or a nation "under no god,' because none of these professions can be neutral with respect to religion," wrote Circuit Judge Alfred T. Goodwin, a Nixon appointee. He was joined in the ruling by Circuit Judge Stephen Reinhardt, a Carter appointee. In a dissent, Circuit Judge Ferdinand F. Fernandez, appointed by the first President George Bush, warned that under his colleagues' theory of the Constitution, "we will soon find ourselves prohibited from using our album of patriotic songs in many public settings." For decades, the U.S. Supreme Court has said schools can require teachers to lead the pledge, but students cannot be punished for refusing to recite it. Wednesday's ruling does not affect Florida. "All our schools begin the day with the Pledge of Allegiance," said Pinellas schools spokesman Ron Stone. "If students don't want to participate, they're not compelled to say it. They just have to remain respectful and quiet during it." This latest federal appeals court ruling would ban the pledge from schools entirely. Hillsborough schools spokesman Mark Hart said it's unlikely that local parents would accept such a ruling. "What works in San Francisco doesn't necessarily work in Tampa," he said. If the decision is not overturned by the full 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, Supreme Court justices will probably review the case next year. Harvard constitutional scholar Laurence Tribe predicted the Supreme Court would reverse the decision unless the 9th Circuit reverses itself first. The 9th Circuit is the nation's most overturned appellate court, partly because it is the largest, but also because it tends to make liberal, activist opinions and because the cases it hears -- on a range of issues from environmental laws to property rights to civil rights -- tend to challenge the status quo. Wednesday's ruling cheered atheists, agnostics and church-state separatists, who pointed out that Congress inserted "under God" into the pledge at the height of the Cold War after a campaign by the Knights of Columbus, religious leaders and others who wanted to distinguish the United States from what they regarded as godless communists. "I think it's great," said Frank Prahl, president of the mid Pinellas chapter of the Americans United for Separation of Church and State. Prahl, who said 15 to 20 percent of Americans have no belief in God, said the court's decision is a strike for the "religious plurality that this country's based on." Few embraced that sentiment Wednesday. Congress and President Bush, reacting with lightning speed, condemned the court decision as an outrage. White House spokesman Ari Fleischer, said that the decision "does not sit well with the president of the United States" and that the Justice Department would fight it. On Capitol Hill, Senate Majority Leader Thomas Daschle, D-S.D., called the ruling "just nuts." House members gathered on the front steps of the Capitol to recite the Pledge of Allegiance en masse and sing God Bless America. Local officials were upset as well. The ruling left Tampa Mayor Dick Greco reeling. "Are you serious?" asked an incredulous mayor. "That is amazing. Forty-five minutes ago, I just said they're really going overboard with liberalism and that's what's going to happen next -- I swear to God -- they're going to outlaw the Pledge of Allegiance. That's terrible." The 9th Circuit covers Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon and Washington state. Those are the only states directly affected. However, the ruling does not take effect for several months, to allow further appeals. The case was brought by Michael A. Newdow, a Sacramento, Calif., atheist who objected because his second-grade daughter was required to listen to her classmates recite the pledge. Newdow, a doctor who holds a law degree and represented himself, called the pledge a "religious idea that certain people don't agree with." Critics of the court's decision warned that it calls into question the use of "In God We Trust" on the nation's currency and the public singing of patriotic songs like God Bless America. In other school-related religious cases, the high court has said public schools cannot post the Ten Commandments. And in March, a federal appeals court ruled that Ohio's motto, "With God, all things are possible," is constitutional and is not an endorsement of Christianity even though it quotes the words of Jesus. Michael Gibbons, professor of government at the University of South Florida, often raises church-state questions in his classroom. He was not surprised by Wednesday's court decision. "The courts have had the tendency to rule against forced, overt references to God," Gibbons said. "The bigger question here is, why does a country that claims to protect liberty, freedom and equality feel the need to require a Pledge of Allegiance in the first place?" -- Times staff writers Bill Adair, Brady Dennis, Tamara Lush, Matthew Waite and Kathryn Wexler contributed to this report, which used information from Times wires.
 © 2006 • All Rights Reserved • St. Petersburg Times
490 First Avenue South • St. Petersburg, FL 33701 • 727-893-8111 
|
From the Times wire desk
From the AP |
