Once again, Pledge ruled unconstitutional

We’ll see if this ruling sticks

Once again, a federal district court in California has declared the Pledge of Allegiance is unconstitutional.

U.S. District Judge Lawrence Karlton ruled that the pledge's reference to one nation “under God” violates school children's right to be “free from a coercive requirement to affirm God.”

Michael Newdow, who had his case against the Pledge rejected by the Supreme Court due to its claim he had lack of legal standing to bring it, was involved again — as an attorney for the plaintiffs.

Unlike that case, the Supremes can’t easily reject this one on that ground.

Newdow, an attorney and a medical doctor, filed an identical case on behalf of three unnamed parents and their children. Karlton said those families have the right to sue.

So, in a year or two, we will see if the Supreme Court, including presumptive Chief Justice John Roberts, actually believes that the fullest expression of the religion clause of the First Amendment includes freedom from religion. We will see just how high Roberts’ church-state “wall” is.

And we will see if, like his mentor Rehnquist, he spouts nonsense about the inoffensiveness of so-called “civic religion.”

Also, we will see if some self-proclaimed secularlists like Kevin Drum are ready for their legal rubber to hit the road, or are going to be squishes on this issue as before.

However, Karlton’s ruling was narrowly phrased and probably will not satisfy all secularists, either, as he himself admitted.

Karlton dismissed claims that the 1954 Congressional legislation inserting the words "under God" was unconstitutional. If his ruling stands, he reasoned that the school children and their parents in the case would not be harmed by the phrase because they would no longer have to recite it at school.

Karlton himself said his opinion “will satisfy no one involved in that debate.”

While I will take what his ruling offers, I fully recognize it as a quarter-loaf at best, not a half-loaf. Count me as grateful for what’s offered but ultimately among the dissatisified from the secular side.