Newdow Back in Court

Michael Newdow, the California atheist who sometimes seems to have nothing better to do than challenge every reference to God found in America, was back in court Tuesday for Round 2 of his campaign to strip the words “under God” from the Pledge of Allegiance. From the AP: SAN FRANCISCO (AP) _ An atheist pleaded […]

Michael Newdow, the California atheist who sometimes seems to have nothing better to do than challenge every reference to God found in America, was back in court Tuesday for Round 2 of his campaign to strip the words “under God” from the Pledge of Allegiance.

From the AP:

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) _ An atheist pleaded with a federal appeals court Tuesday to remove the words “under God” from the Pledge of Allegiance and “In God We Trust” from U.S. currency, saying the references disrespect his religious beliefs.


“I want to be treated equally,” said Michael Newdow, who argued the cases consecutively to a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. He added that supporters of the phrases “want to have their religious views espoused by the government.”

Newdow, a Sacramento doctor and lawyer, sued his daughter’s school district in 2000 for forcing public school children to recite the pledge, saying it was unconstitutional.

The 9th Circuit ruled in Newdow’s favor in 2002, but two years later, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that he lacked standing to sue because he didn’t have custody of the daughter on whose behalf he brought the case. He immediately filed a second lawsuit on behalf of three unidentified parents and their children in another district.

In 2005, a federal judge in Sacramento again found in favor of Newdow, ruling the pledge was unconstitutional. The judge said he was following the precedent set by the 9th Circuit’s ruling in Newdow’s first case.

Terence Cassidy, a lawyer for the school district, argued Tuesday that reciting the pledge is simply a “patriotic exercise” and a reminder of the traditions of the U.S.

“How is pledging allegiance to a nation under God not a religious act?” Judge Dorothy W. Nelson asked. Cassidy said the pledge has religious elements but is not a religious exercise.

Newdow said the pledge has “tons of religious significance. That’s why everyone gets so angry when we talk about … taking it out.”


Nelson asked Cassidy whether removing the words “under God” would make the pledge any less patriotic.

“Not necessarily,” he replied, arguing it provided a historical context, not a religious one.

Congress added the words “under God” to the Pledge of Allegiance in 1954, and passed a law requiring all U.S. currency to carry the motto “In God We Trust” a year later. Congress first authorized a reference to God on money in 1864.

Donate to Support Independent Journalism!

Donate Now!