Q: Is it true a federal appeals court ruled the Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional?
A: In an outrageous decision handed down by the Ninth Circuit Court based in San Francisco, a three-judge panel in June indeed ruled the Pledge of Allegiance was unconstitutional. If the ruling were allowed to stand, public school students in nine western states covered by the court could no longer recite the pledge in the classroom. That’s because the court ruled that the words "under God," added in 1954, violated the constitutional principle of separation of church and state. The 2-1 decision set off a firestorm across the country, igniting condemnation by liberals, conservatives and everyone in between. For generations of American schoolchildren, the Pledge of Allegiance has served as a daily civics lesson, uniting classmates together with a shared national heritage and helping them to appreciate the values and principles so fundamental to the American way of life, including ‘Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.’ The day after the ruling was issued, the U.S. Senate voted unanimously to reaffirm Congress’ decision in 1954 to insert "one Nation under God" into the Pledge of Allegiance. Quite frankly, the ruling flies in the face of the eloquent statement written by the architect of the Declaration of Independence. Thomas Jefferson laid the foundation of our nation 226 years ago, writing that we are ‘endowed by [their] Creator with certain unalienable rights.’ It seems to me the jurists serving on the Ninth Circuit are bent on making their own personal judgments instead of interpreting the laws of land. With this decision, it shows the ruling majority ignored the historical context linking America’s past, present and future with the existence of an almighty God.
Q: What happens next?
A: Already the controversial decision is headed for appeal. Remarkably, the judge who wrote the majority opinion declaring the Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional put a hold on his legal ruling the very next day. Apparently, he saw the writing on the wall. The ridiculous ruling is way off base and runs contrary to mainstream America. Such an outlandish decision could set a dangerous legal precedent. Would the phrase on the nation’s currency ‘In God We Trust’ be considered a violation of church and state? This underscores the need for the United States Senate to get moving on the confirmation of the President's judicial nominees who will follow the constitution rather than try to change it to their radical views. Issued just a week before Independence Day and less than a year after the terrorist attacks on America’s homeland, the ruling is quite simply unpatriotic.