Mention of God not a legal disqualifier

June 26, 2002

ATLANTA: The Southeastern Legal Foundation today responded to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decision declaring "under God" in the nation's Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional, calling the decision "controversial and ripe for consideration." Newdow v. U.S. Congress, et al (9th Cir. 00-16423).

"In 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court turned back an appeal to declare unconstitutional the nation's motto, 'In God We Trust,' and we are confident that the high court will apply the same judicial mindset to the 9th Circuit appeal," said Phil Kent, SLF President. "The California appeals three-judge panel has taken an extreme position in defense of the so-called Establishment Clause of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution."

At issue is whether the use of the phrase "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance, approved by Congress in 1954, violates tenets of the First Amendment freedom of religion of religion clause. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in today's decision that the phrase was a 'religious' one. In 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court turned back an appeal from the 10th Circuit of Appeals seeking to declare the national motto, "In God We Trust,' unconstitutional on similar grounds (Gaylor, et al. v United States, et al).

"Our attorneys will seek to join the appeal as friends of the court, and will take the position that the state does not endorse a particular religion by generically mentioning God in the Pledge of Allegiance," said Kent. "I suppose the Declaration of Independence is next, as we are 'endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights.'"

For More Information Contact:
Media Relations
media@southeasternlegal.org
(404) 365-8500