Recently the United States Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit ruled against Dr. Newdow et al. in their case questioning the constitutionality of inserting "under God" into the national Pledge of Allegiance. Our attorney Dean Cook called my attention to this paragraph from the dissenting opinion of District Judge Reinhardt:
Today’s majority opinion will undoubtedly be celebrated by a large number of Americans as a repudiation of activist, liberal, Godless judging. That is its great appeal; it reaches the result favored by a substantial majority of our fellow countrymen and thereby avoids the political outcry that would follow were we to reach the constitutionally required result. Nevertheless, by reaching the result the majority does, we have failed in our constitutional duty as a court. Jan Roe and her child turned to the federal judiciary in the hope that we would vindicate their constitutional rights. There was a time when their faith in us might have been well placed. I can only hope that such a time will return someday.
The United States Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit has scheduled an oral argument hearing to take place in a month for our similar case regarding the constitutionality of the insertion of "under God" into the Texas state pledge. Recently our state Attorney General boasted at a Christian award ceremony of his defense of the mandatory Moment of Silence law against our First Amendment challenge in this same court.
Posts
