4 of 4

Rutherford Institute President John W. Whitehead sides with Dobson on this one. "We had hoped that the Court would set the record straight once and for all by confirming the unequivocal affirmation of thirteen Supreme Court Justices across four decades that state-led recitation of 'under God' in the Pledge of Allegiance does not violate the Establishment Clause," he said. "While we are pleased that this time-honored tradition can continue, The Rutherford Institute remains committed to standing in defense of the constitutionality of this practice should any future challenges arise."

Liberty Counsel president Mat Staver doesn't address whether the court should have found standing, and is simply content that "Schoolchildren in states covered by the Ninth Circuit can now say the entire pledge of allegiance without fear of censorship."

Former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore, now head of the Foundation for Moral Law, is so far the only one calling for legislative action. "The danger still remains, as the Supreme Court dismissed the case on a legality. If the Constitution Restoration Act 2004, were to be passed in Congress, the federal courts could never again be used to strike down the constitutionality of the Pledge of Allegiance. Congress should take action now to save the Pledge and other public acknowledgements of God."

Tomorrow, we'll round up more responses to the Court's decision (or indecision), as well as discuss the "ceremonial deism" in the Bush and Kerry campaigns, as covered in this week's Time cover section.

News links so far on the Supreme Court case:

• Supreme Court preserves 'God' in Pledge (Associated Press)
• Supreme Court decides Pledge case on technicality (Reuters)
• Pledge schmedge | The pledge fights ends with a procedural whimper and not the substantive bang all the loudmouth talk show hosts were hoping for (Andrew Cohen, CBS News)
• Supreme Court dismisses Pledge case on technicality | Justices Do Not Decide Constitutionality of Reference to God in Pledge of Allegiance (The Washington Post)
• Supreme Court case on Pledge is dismissed on technicality | The Supreme Court's ruling today at least temporarily preserved the phrase "one nation, under God," in the Pledge of Allegiance (The New York Times)
• Justices uphold Pledge of Allegiance | Justices sidestep "under God" debate by ruling that a non-custodial parent can't sue. More litigation on the issue is expected (Los Angeles Times)
• US Supreme Court rules against atheist in 'under God' battle (AFP)

Another interesting site:

• Goldstein & Howe's SCOTUSBlog — a group weblog devoted to parsing Supreme Court news and analysis. Lyle Denniston notes that three related lawsuits in Colorado, Pennsylvania, and Virginia may force the Pledge issue again.

Suggest links and stories by sending e-mail to weblog@christianitytoday.com

What is Weblog?

Check out Books & Culture's weekly weblog, Content & Context.

See our past Weblog updates:

June 10 | 9 | 8 | 7

June 4 | 3 | 2 | 1

May 28 | 26 | 25 | 24

May 21 | 20 | 19 | 18 | 17

May 14b | 14a | 13 | 12 | 11 | 10

May 7 | 6 | 5 | 4 | 3

and more, back to November 1999

first page |  4 of 4

share this page

June (Web-only) 2004, Vol. 48