A federal court has delivered a one-two punch to a strident California atheist who has repeatedly tried to have references to God removed from the Pledge of Allegiance and U.S. currency.
You may remember Dr. Michael Newdow’s attempts a few years back to have the words “under God” removed from the pledge when it is recited by public school students, and to remove “In God We Trust” from our money. Americans were outraged in 2002 when the ultraliberal 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the removal of “under God” from the pledge. It is clear to most people that those words do not violate the First Amendment of our U.S. Constitution, which guarantees the free exercise of religion and prohibits only the “establishment of religion” by Congress.
The Supreme Court properly overturned the 9th Circuit’s ruling, but only on technical grounds. The high court did not rule on the merits (or demerits) of Dr. Newdow’s claims.
So he filed suit again, meeting the technical requirements and demanding anew that “under God” be stricken from the pledge when it is recited in public schools. He also resurrected his previously defeated claim that “In God We Trust” should be removed from our currency.
But this time, surprisingly, a three-judge panel of the liberal 9th Circuit rejected Dr. Newdow’s claims. In separate rulings, it upheld the constitutionality of both phrases.
He is likely to appeal to a larger panel of the federal court or to the Supreme Court, so the battle may not be over. But for now, at least, teachers may still legally lead schoolchildren in the full pledge, and the federal government may continue to print money saying “In God We Trust.”