Share this story
Close X
Switch to Desktop Site

Federal court approves 'under God' in Pledge of Allegiance

Atheist Michael Newdow challenged 'under God' in the Pledge of Allegiance and 'in God we trust' on US currency as unconstitutional endorsements of religion. But the Ninth US Circuit Court of Appeals said the references to God are grounded in historical philosophy and politics.

New York City public school students recite the Pledge of Allegiance at the start of their day in this file photo. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected challenges to 'under God' in the Pledge and 'In God We Trust' on currency.


About these ads

An atheist activist from Sacramento failed to convince a federal court in California that references to God in the Pledge of Allegiance and on US currency are unconstitutional endorsements of religion.

In two separate cases, Michael Newdow, who previously challenged the Pledge in a case that reached the US Supreme Court in 2004, attempted to further his long-running campaign to strip references to God from the public domain.

In Mr. Newdow’s latest case against “under God” in the Pledge, the Ninth US Circuit Court of Appeals panel ruled, in a 2-to-1 decision, that the schoolroom routine for millions of children is not a violation of the Constitution, but a historical reflection of the Founding Fathers’ beliefs that “serves to unite our vast nation.”

“Not every mention of God or religion by our government or at the government’s direction is a violation of the Establishment Clause,” wrote Judge Carlos Bea for the majority in the opinion that was issued Thursday.


Page:   1   |   2

Follow Stories Like This
Get the Monitor stories you care about delivered to your inbox.