DOCSLIB.ORG

"Under God" in the Pledge

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Volume 1 of 4 FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT Dr. MICHAEL A. NEWDOW; PAT DOE; JAN DOE; DOECHILD; JAN POE; POECHILD; ROECHILD-1, Plaintiffs, and JAN ROE and ROECHILD-2, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. RIO LINDA UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT, Defendant-Appellant, and Nos. 05-17257 05-17344 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; JOHN 06-15093 CAREY; ADRIENNE CAREY; BRENDEN D.C. No. CAREY; ADAM ARAIZA; ANITA CV-05-00017- ARAIZA; ALBERT ARAIZA; MICHAELA LKK BISHOP; CRAIG BISHOP; MARIE BISHOP; TERESA DECLINES; DARIEN OPINION DECLINES; RYANNA DECLINES; ROMMEL DECLINES; JANICE DECLINES; ANTHONY DOERR; DAN DOERR; KAREN DOERR; SEAN FORSCHLER; TIFFANY FORSCHLER; FRED FORSCHLER; ESTERLITA FORSCHLER; MARY MCKAY; ROBERT MCKAY; SHARON MCKAY; THE KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS, Defendants-Intervenors-Appellants, and 3865 3866 NEWDOW v. RIO LINDA USD CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; ELK GROVE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT; SACRAMENTO CITY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT; Dr. STEVEN LADD, Superintendent, Elk Grove Unified School District; M. MAGDALENA CARRILLO MEJIA, Superintendent, Sacramento City Unified School District; Dr. DIANNA MANGERICH, Superintendent, Elverta Joint Elementary School District; FRANK S. PORTER, Superintendent, Rio Linda Unified School District; PETER LEFEVRE, Law Revision Counsel; ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, Governor of California; RICHARD J. RIORDAN, California Secretary for Education, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Lawrence K. Karlton, District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted December 4, 2007—San Francisco, California Filed March 11, 2010 Before: Dorothy W. Nelson, Stephen Reinhardt, and Carlos T. Bea, Circuit Judges. Opinion by Judge Bea; Dissent by Judge Reinhardt NEWDOW v. RIO LINDA USD 3871 COUNSEL Dr. Michael Newdow (argued), Sacramento, California, for plaintiffs-appellees Jan Roe, et al. Craig M. Blackwell, Theodore C. Hirt, Peter D. Keisler, McGregor W. Scott, Gregory G. Katsas (argued), Robert M. Loeb, Lowell V. Sturgill, Jr., Department of Justice, Washing- ton, D.C., for defendant-intervenor-appellant United States. Terence J. Cassidy (argued), Michael W. Pott, Thomas L. Riordan, Porter, Scott, Weiberg & Delehant, Sacramento, Cal- ifornia, for defendant-appellant Rio Linda Union School Dis- trict. Kevin J. Hasson (argued), Anthony R. Picarello, Jr., Derek L. Gaubatz, Eric C. Rassbach, Jared N. Leland, The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, Washington, D.C., for defendants- intervenors-appellants John Carey et al. Amici:* As Amicus Curiae in Support of Defendants-Appellants: Patrick T. Gillen, Ann Arbor, Michigan, for the Thomas More Law Center; *The amici in this case are extensive and include the following: All 50 States; the Pacific Justice Institute; the American Legion; the National Legal Foundation; the Thomas More Law Center; the Foundation for Moral Law; Los Angeles County; Rex Curry; the Appignani Humanist Legal Center; the Freedom from Religion Foundation, Inc.; American Atheists Inc.; the Madison-Jefferson Society; the Secular Coalition for America; the Atheists and Other Freethinkers, Humanist Association of Las Vegas and Southern Nevada, Agnostic and Atheist Student Associa- tion, Las Vegas Freethought Society; and the Humanist Community, Humanists of Houston, and the Humanist Association of the Greater Sac- ramento. We thank them all for their thoughts and efforts regarding this case. 3872 NEWDOW v. RIO LINDA USD Peter D. Lepiscopo, James M. Griffiths, Law Offices of Peter D. Lepiscopo, San Diego, California for the Pacific Justice Institute; Eric L. Hirschhorn, Anne W. Stukes, Andrew C. Nichols, Winston & Strawn LLP, Washington, DC, and Philip B. Onderdonk, Jr. for The American Legion, Indianapolis, Indi- ana; Greg Abbott, R. Ted Cruz, Office of the Attorney General, Austin, Texas; Lawrence Wasden, Attorney General of Idaho; Drew Edmondson, Attorney General of Oklahoma; Troy King, Attorney General of Alabama for all 50 States; Roy S. Moore, Gregory M. Jones, Benjamin D. Dupré, for the Foundation for Moral Law, Montgomery, Alabama; Steven W. Fitschen, The National Legal Foundation, Virginia Beach, Virginia, for the National Legal Foundation; and Raymond G. Fortner, Jr., Ralph L. Rosato, Doraine F. Meyer for the County of Los Angeles. As Amicus Curiae in Support of Plaintiffs-Appellees: Dr. Rex Curry, Tampa, Florida; Chris J. Evans, American Atheists, Inc., Irvine, California; for American Atheists, Inc.; George Daly, Charlotte, North Carolina, for the Freedom From Religion Foundation, Inc.; Shawn C. Mills and Paul S. Sanford, Aptos, California, for the Madison-Jefferson Society; Herb Silverman, Washington, D.C., for the Secular Coalition; NEWDOW v. RIO LINDA USD 3873 Norman Goldman, Los Angeles, California, for Atheists and other Freethinkers, Humanist Association of Las Vegas and Southern Nevada, Agnostic and Atheist Student Association, Las Vegas Freethought Society, The Humanist Community, Humanists of Houston, Humanist Association of the Greater Sacramento; and Melvin S. Limpan, Washington, D.C. for Appignani Human- ist Legal Centerl. OPINION BEA, Circuit Judge: I. Introduction We are called upon to decide whether the teacher-led reci- tation of the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, by students in public schools constitutes an establishment of reli- gion prohibited by the United States Constitution. We hold it does not; the Pledge is constitutional. The Pledge of Allegiance serves to unite our vast nation through the proud recitation of some of the ideals upon which our Republic was founded and for which we continue to strive: one Nation under God—the Founding Fathers’ belief that the people of this nation are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; indivisible—although we have individual states, they are united in one Republic; with liberty —the government cannot take away the people’s inalienable rights; and justice for all—everyone in America is entitled to “equal justice under the law” (as is inscribed above the main entrance to our Supreme Court). Millions of people daily recite these words when pledging allegiance to the United States of America: 3874 NEWDOW v. RIO LINDA USD I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. 4 U.S.C. § 4 (2002). Pursuant to California Education Code § 52720, the Rio Linda Union School District in California (“the School Dis- trict”) has a practice that every morning, willing students, led by their teachers, face the American Flag, place their right hands over their hearts, and recite the Pledge of Allegiance. Plaintiff Jan Roe is a self-proclaimed atheist whose child, RoeChild-2, attends elementary school in the School District. Roe filed suit alleging that the words “under God” in the Pledge offend her belief that there is no God, interfere with her right to direct her child’s upbringing, and indoctrinate her child with the belief that God exists. The parties have stipu- lated that RoeChild-2 has never recited the Pledge, but Roe nevertheless asks us to prohibit the recitation of the Pledge by other students. Thus, this case presents a familiar dilemma in our pluralistic society—how to balance conflicting interests when one group wants to do something for patriotic reasons that another groups finds offensive to its religious (or atheis- tic) beliefs. In other words, does Roe have the right to prevent teachers from leading other students from reciting the Pledge of Allegiance—something we all agree is a patriotic exercise —because the mention of God in the Pledge offends her as an atheist? Plaintiffs challenge the School District’s policy as consti- tuting a violation of the Establishment Clause: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.” U.S. Const. amend. I. The Pledge reflects many beliefs held by the Founding Fathers of this country—the same men who authored the NEWDOW v. RIO LINDA USD 3875 Establishment Clause—including the belief that it is the peo- ple who should and do hold the power, not the government. They believed that the people derive their most important rights, not from the government, but from God: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. The Declaration of Independence, 1 U.S.C. § XLIII (1776) (emphasis added). The Founders did not see these two ideas— that individuals possessed certain God-given rights which no government can take away, and that we do not want our nation to establish a religion—as being in conflict. Not every mention of God or religion by our government or at the government’s direction is a violation of the Estab- lishment Clause. See Lynch v. Donnelly, 465 U.S. 668, 673 (1984) (“Nor does the Constitution require complete separa- tion of church and state; it affirmatively mandates accommo- dation, not merely tolerance, of all religions, and forbids hostility toward any.”). The Supreme Court has upheld sev- eral government actions that contained a religious element against Establishment Clause claims: a display of the Ten Commandments on the Texas State Capitol grounds;1 the dis- play of a Chanukah menorah outside a City-County Building;2 the display of a Nativity scene in a public Christmas display;3 a state legislature’s practice of opening each day with a prayer led by a chaplain paid with state funds;4 a state’s property tax exemption for religious organizations;5 and a township’s pro- 1Van Orden v. Perry, 545 U.S. 677, 681 (2005). 2County of Allegheny v. ACLU, 492 U.S. 573, 578-79 (1989). 3Lynch v. Donnelly, 465 U.S. 668, 670-71 (1984). 4Marsh v. Chambers, 463 U.S. 783, 784-86 (1983). 5Walz v. Tax Comm’n, 397 U.S. 664, 667 (1970). 3876 NEWDOW v. RIO LINDA USD gram for reimbursing parents for the cost of transporting their children to parochial schools.6 Each of these cases involved religion.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 8364 Licensed Charities As of 3/10/2020 MICS 24404 MICS 52720 T
    8364 Licensed Charities as of 3/10/2020 MICS 24404 MICS 52720 T. Rowe Price Program for Charitable Giving, Inc. The David Sheldrick Wildlife Trust USA, Inc. 100 E. Pratt St 25283 Cabot Road, Ste. 101 Baltimore MD 21202 Laguna Hills CA 92653 Phone: (410)345-3457 Phone: (949)305-3785 Expiration Date: 10/31/2020 Expiration Date: 10/31/2020 MICS 52752 MICS 60851 1 For 2 Education Foundation 1 Michigan for the Global Majority 4337 E. Grand River, Ste. 198 1920 Scotten St. Howell MI 48843 Detroit MI 48209 Phone: (425)299-4484 Phone: (313)338-9397 Expiration Date: 07/31/2020 Expiration Date: 07/31/2020 MICS 46501 MICS 60769 1 Voice Can Help 10 Thousand Windows, Inc. 3290 Palm Aire Drive 348 N Canyons Pkwy Rochester Hills MI 48309 Livermore CA 94551 Phone: (248)703-3088 Phone: (571)263-2035 Expiration Date: 07/31/2021 Expiration Date: 03/31/2020 MICS 56240 MICS 10978 10/40 Connections, Inc. 100 Black Men of Greater Detroit, Inc 2120 Northgate Park Lane Suite 400 Attn: Donald Ferguson Chattanooga TN 37415 1432 Oakmont Ct. Phone: (423)468-4871 Lake Orion MI 48362 Expiration Date: 07/31/2020 Phone: (313)874-4811 Expiration Date: 07/31/2020 MICS 25388 MICS 43928 100 Club of Saginaw County 100 Women Strong, Inc. 5195 Hampton Place 2807 S. State Street Saginaw MI 48604 Saint Joseph MI 49085 Phone: (989)790-3900 Phone: (888)982-1400 Expiration Date: 07/31/2020 Expiration Date: 07/31/2020 MICS 58897 MICS 60079 1888 Message Study Committee, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • 9438 Tthhee Uu..Ss
    #9438 TTHHEE UU..SS.. FFLLAAGG FILM IDEAS, INC. 2002 Grade Levels: 3-8 13 minutes DESCRIPTION Recalls the history of the United States flag from the Revolutionary War to the present. Explains what flags symbolize and what the parts of the flag mean. Also recalls flag etiquette and stresses the importance of respecting this symbol of America. ACADEMIC STANDARDS Subject Area: Civics • Standard: Understands the importance of Americans sharing and supporting certain values, beliefs, and principles of American constitutional democracy Benchmark: Knows how various symbols are used to depict Americans’ shared values, principles, and beliefs and explain their meaning (e.g., the flag, Statue of Liberty, Statue of Justice, Uncle Sam, great seal, national anthem, oaths of office, mottoes such as E Pluribus Unum) Subject Area: Historical Understanding • Standard: Understands the historical perspective Benchmark: Understands that specific individuals had a great impact on history Benchmark: Understands that specific ideas had an impact on history INSTRUCTIONAL GOALS 1. To define what symbols are and what the U.S. flag represents. 2. To review the history of the U.S. Flag. 3. To demonstrate how to properly care and display the U.S. flag. 4. To introduce the important people and events involved with the origins and creation of the U.S. flag. 5. To explore the meaning of Memorial Day, The Star-Spangled Banner, and The Pledge of Allegiance. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The historic story of the American flag is told from Revolutionary War days to the present. Viewers see many of the flags that have flown over the United States: the “Join or Die,” the “Don’t Tread on Me,” the “Continental Colors,” and the Stars and Stripes, while learning the historical background of each one.
    [Show full text]
  • USCOURTS-Ca9-06-15093-0.Pdf
    Case: 06-15093 03/11/2010 ID: 7261293 DktEntry: 106-1 Page: 1 of 193 Volume 1 of 4 FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT Dr. MICHAEL A. NEWDOW; PAT DOE; JAN DOE; DOECHILD; JAN POE; POECHILD; ROECHILD-1, Plaintiffs, and JAN ROE and ROECHILD-2, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. RIO LINDA UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT, Defendant-Appellant, and Nos. 05-17257 05-17344 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; JOHN 06-15093 CAREY; ADRIENNE CAREY; BRENDEN D.C. No. CAREY; ADAM ARAIZA; ANITA CV-05-00017- ARAIZA; ALBERT ARAIZA; MICHAELA LKK BISHOP; CRAIG BISHOP; MARIE BISHOP; TERESA DECLINES; DARIEN OPINION DECLINES; RYANNA DECLINES; ROMMEL DECLINES; JANICE DECLINES; ANTHONY DOERR; DAN DOERR; KAREN DOERR; SEAN FORSCHLER; TIFFANY FORSCHLER; FRED FORSCHLER; ESTERLITA FORSCHLER; MARY MCKAY; ROBERT MCKAY; SHARON MCKAY; THE KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS, Defendants-Intervenors-Appellants, and 3865 Case: 06-15093 03/11/2010 ID: 7261293 DktEntry: 106-1 Page: 2 of 193 3866 NEWDOW v. RIO LINDA USD CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; ELK GROVE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT; SACRAMENTO CITY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT; Dr. STEVEN LADD, Superintendent, Elk Grove Unified School District; M. MAGDALENA CARRILLO MEJIA, Superintendent, Sacramento City Unified School District; Dr. DIANNA MANGERICH, Superintendent, Elverta Joint Elementary School District; FRANK S. PORTER, Superintendent, Rio Linda Unified School District; PETER LEFEVRE, Law Revision Counsel; ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, Governor of California; RICHARD J. RIORDAN, California Secretary for Education, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Lawrence K. Karlton, District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted December 4, 2007—San Francisco, California Filed March 11, 2010 Before: Dorothy W.
    [Show full text]
  • The Pledge of Allegiance"
    Author of "THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE" This tribute to Bro. Francis Bellamy was writ-ten by Bro. John R. Nocas, 33 ø, PGHP, and condensed by him for use as a Short Talk Bulletin. ~ (Hand writen) 'THE PLEDGE IN BELLAMYS HANDWRITING Who wrote the Pledge of Allegiance to our Flag? Can you imagine a time when this was not known? Well, truth is stranger than fiction, for up until 1939 it was not certain who had written the Pledge, and what's more, until that time no one seemed to care. Finally, in that year, after years of research a committee of the U.S. Flag Association ruled that Francis J. Bellamy had indeed written our Pledge of Allegiance. Shown above is the Pledge in his own handwriting. The "to" was inserted for the sake of rhythm. The Reverend Francis J. Bellamy was a Mason, a member of Little Falls Lodge No. 181, Little Falls, New York. The Order of the Eastern Star erected a memorial tablet to him in 1955 in Oriskany, New York. At the First National Flag Conference in Washington, D.C., June 14, 1923, the words "the Flag of the United States" was substituted for "my flag." The change was made on the grounds that those born in foreign countries might have in mind the flag of their native land when giving the Pledge. The Second National Flag Conference in Washington on Flag Day, 1924, added, for the sake of greater definition, the words "of America." On Flag Day, 1954, President Dwight D. Eisenhower signed an Act of Congress adding the words "under God." For greater meaning and proper presentation when reciting the Pledge there should be only three pauses: 1.
    [Show full text]
  • In God We Trust
    IN THIS ISSUE • Money’s Motto “In God We Trust” is Constitutional • Court Voids Law on Animal Cruelty • Spousal Support Contract Enforceable Against Husband • Defective Sperm Could Not Be May 2010 Basis for Suit Money’s Motto “In God We Trust” is Constitutional SUMMARY: The statutes requiring that “In God We Trust” be Looking only at the motto Newdow opposes, and printed on U.S. paper money and stamped into U.S. coins do the wording of the Establishment Clause, his argument looks not violate the First Amendment because that motto is strong. Yet in 1970, the Ninth Circuit decided a case called ceremonial or patriotic and not an affirmative effort by the Aronow v. United States making the same essential argument government to advocate religious belief. The United States Newdow made here—that “In God We Trust” violates the First Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit decided Newdow v. Amendment’s Establishment Clause. In that case, the Ninth LeFevre on March 11, 2010. Circuit disagreed. Rather than a sincere statement or command of unified religious belief, the motto, ruled the court, was a BACKGROUND: Michael Newdow is an ordained minister in more generalized and symbolic slogan with a ceremonial or and founder of the First Amendmist Church of True Science, a patriotic purpose. Its function was rooted in tradition rather religion whose members believe that there is no god. Newdow than religion and the motto’s appearance on money did not has brought various lawsuits intended to end government impede people’s ability to believe or disbelieve according to practices that he and his church argue advance belief in a their own ideas and feelings.
    [Show full text]
  • Newdow Calls for a New Day in Establishment Clause Jurisprudence: Justice Thomas's "Actual Legal Coercion" Standard Provides the Necessary Renovation James A
    The University of Akron IdeaExchange@UAkron Akron Law Review Akron Law Journals July 2015 Newdow Calls for a New Day in Establishment Clause Jurisprudence: Justice Thomas's "Actual Legal Coercion" Standard Provides the Necessary Renovation James A. Campbell Please take a moment to share how this work helps you through this survey. Your feedback will be important as we plan further development of our repository. Follow this and additional works at: http://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/akronlawreview Part of the First Amendment Commons, and the Supreme Court of the United States Commons Recommended Citation Campbell, James A. (2006) "Newdow Calls for a New Day in Establishment Clause Jurisprudence: Justice Thomas's "Actual Legal Coercion" Standard Provides the Necessary Renovation," Akron Law Review: Vol. 39 : Iss. 2 , Article 6. Available at: http://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/akronlawreview/vol39/iss2/6 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Akron Law Journals at IdeaExchange@UAkron, the institutional repository of The nivU ersity of Akron in Akron, Ohio, USA. It has been accepted for inclusion in Akron Law Review by an authorized administrator of IdeaExchange@UAkron. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Campbell: Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow CAMPBELL1.DOC 4/14/2006 1:14:41 PM NEWDOW CALLS FOR A NEW DAY IN ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE JURISPRUDENCE: JUSTICE THOMAS’S “ACTUAL LEGAL COERCION” STANDARD PROVIDES THE NECESSARY RENOVATION I. INTRODUCTION Most Supreme Court cases fly under the radar of the national media. Occasionally, however, the media finds a case worthy of being thrust into the spotlight.1 In 2004, the Supreme Court faced such a case in Elk Grove Unified School District v.
    [Show full text]
  • Learn About the United States Quick Civics Lessons for the Naturalization Test
    Learn About the United States Quick Civics Lessons for the Naturalization Test M-638 (rev. 02/19) Learn About the United States: Quick Civics Lessons Thank you for your interest in becoming a citizen of the United States of America. Your decision to apply for IMPORTANT NOTE: On the naturalization test, some U.S. citizenship is a very meaningful demonstration of answers may change because of elections or appointments. your commitment to this country. As you study for the test, make sure that you know the As you prepare for U.S. citizenship, Learn About the United most current answers to these questions. Answer these States: Quick Civics Lessons will help you study for the civics questions with the name of the official who is serving and English portions of the naturalization interview. at the time of your eligibility interview with USCIS. The USCIS Officer will not accept an incorrect answer. There are 100 civics (history and government) questions on the naturalization test. During your naturalization interview, you will be asked up to 10 questions from the list of 100 questions. You must answer correctly 6 of the 10 questions to pass the civics test. More Resources to Help You Study Applicants who are age 65 or older and have been a permanent resident for at least 20 years at the time of Visit the USCIS Citizenship Resource Center at filing the Form N-400, Application for Naturalization, uscis.gov/citizenship to find additional educational are only required to study 20 of the 100 civics test materials. Be sure to look for these helpful study questions for the naturalization test.
    [Show full text]
  • Pledge/ Star-Spangled
    The History of the Pledge of Allegiance Many Americans looked forward to October 11, 1892 (Columbus Day). That date marked the 400th Anniversary of the discovery of America. Events were planned for years in advance. Americans were looking forward to the beginning of a new century. The United States had recovered from most of the effects of its Civil War that began 30 years earlier, and people from around the world were flocking to the "Land of Opportunity." The previous year almost a half million immigrants had entered the United States through the Barge Office in Battery Park, New York and on New Years day of 1892 the new Federal Bureau of Receiving's station at Ellis Island had opened. The largest World’s Fair in history was scheduled to open in Chicago in 1893. Two men interested in both education and planned Columbus Day celebrations were Francis Bellamy and James Upham. To this day it is still unknown which of the two men actually authored the words that were to become the Pledge of Allegiance. It was published anonymously and not copyrighted. James Upham was an employee of the Boston publishing firm that produced "The Youth's Companion" in which it first appeared. Francis Bellamy was an educator who served as chairman of the National committee of educators and civic leaders who were planning the Columbus Day activities. What we do know for certain is that the words first appeared in the September 8, 1892 issue of "The Youth's Companion", and a month later more than 12 million school children recited the words for the first time in schools across the nation.
    [Show full text]
  • Title 4—Flag and Seal, Seat of Government, and the States § 4
    Page 3 TITLE 4—FLAG AND SEAL, SEAT OF GOVERNMENT, AND THE STATES § 4 Standard proportions Hoist Width of Hoist Fly (width) of Fly 0.054 0.054 0.063 0.063 Diameter stripe (width) of (length) of Union (length) of of star 0.0769 flag 1.0 flag 1.9 0.5385 Union 0.76 0.0616 (1⁄13) (7⁄13) A B C D E F G H K L § 2. Same; additional stars $100 or by imprisonment for not more than thir- ty days, or both, in the discretion of the court. On the admission of a new State into the The words ‘‘flag, standard, colors, or ensign’’, as Union one star shall be added to the union of the used herein, shall include any flag, standard, flag; and such addition shall take effect on the fourth day of July then next succeeding such ad- colors, ensign, or any picture or representation mission. of either, or of any part or parts of either, made of any substance or represented on any sub- (July 30, 1947, ch. 389, 61 Stat. 642.) stance, of any size evidently purporting to be ei- ther of said flag, standard, colors, or ensign of § 3. Use of flag for advertising purposes; mutila- the United States of America or a picture or a tion of flag representation of either, upon which shall be Any person who, within the District of Colum- shown the colors, the stars and the stripes, in bia, in any manner, for exhibition or display, any number of either thereof, or of any part or shall place or cause to be placed any word, fig- parts of either, by which the average person see- ure, mark, picture, design, drawing, or any ad- ing the same without deliberation may believe vertisement of any nature upon any flag, stand- the same to represent the flag, colors, standard, ard, colors, or ensign of the United States of or ensign of the United States of America.
    [Show full text]
  • Newdow V. Congress February 2013 Original Complaint Page Iii CLAIM 6
    Michael Newdow Pro hac vice (pending) USDC-SDNY Bar PO Box 233345 Sacramento, CA 95823 (916) 273-3798 [email protected] Edwin M. Reiskind, Jr. Friend & Reiskind PLLC 100 William Street, #1220 New York, NY 10038 (212) 587-1960 (212) 587-1957 (Fax) [email protected] IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Civil Action No. ORIGINAL COMPLAINT ROSALYN NEWDOW; KENNETH BRONSTEIN; BENJAMIN DREIDEL; NEIL GRAHAM; JULIE WOODWARD; JAN AND PAT DOE; DOE-CHILD1 AND DOE-CHILD2; ALEX AND DREW ROE; ROE-CHILD1, ROE-CHILD2, AND ROE-CHILD3; VAL AND JADE COE; COE-CHILD1 AND COE-CHILD2; NEW YORK CITY ATHEISTS; FREEDOM FROM RELIGION FOUNDATION; Plaintiffs, v. THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; TIMOTHY F. GEITHNER, SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY; RICHARD A. PETERSON, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, UNITED STATES MINT; LARRY R. FELIX, DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF ENGRAVING AND PRINTING; Defendants. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Newdow v. The Congress of the United States Original Complaint TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ........................................................................................................ v JURISDICTION AND VENUE ................................................................................................... 1 PARTIES ........................................................................................................................................ 2 A. PLAINTIFFS ........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Old Glory, a Symbol of Freedom
    THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE I remember this one teacher. To me, he was the greatest teacher, a real sage of my time. He had much wisdom. We were all reciting the Pledge of Allegiance, and he walked over. Mr. Lasswell was his name … He said: “I’ve been listening to you boys and girls recite the Pledge of Allegiance all semester and it seems as though it is becoming monotonous to you. If I may, may I recite it and try to explain to you the meaning of each word. I – me, an individual, a committee of one. Pledge – dedicate all my worldly goods to give without self-pity. Allegiance – my love and my devotion. To the Flag – our standard, Old Glory, a symbol of freedom. Where ever she waves, there is respect because your loyalty has given her a dignity that shouts freedom is everybody’s job. Of the United – that means that we have all come together. States – individual communities that have united into 48 states, 48 individual communities with pride and dignity and purpose, all divided with imaginary boundaries, yet united to a common purpose, and that’s love of country. Of America And to the Republic – a state in which sovereign power is invested in representatives chosen by the people to govern. For which it stands One nation – meaning, so blessed by God. Indivisible – incapable of being divided. With liberty – which is freedom and the right of power to live one’s life without threats or fear or some sort of retaliation. And justice – The principle or quality of dealing fairly with others.
    [Show full text]
  • The History of the Pledge of Allegiance
    REV: FINAL The History of the Pledge of Allegiance I stand before you this evening in the uniform of the Heroes of ’76, a side order of the National Sojourners. The uniform is representative of those worn by members of our Brother George Washington’s Continental Army and is, in part, a symbol of the commitment the National Sojourners make to Proudly Serve the Cause of Patriotism. Such service, however is not unique to individual Sojourners --- in fact, it could be said that Proudly Serving the Cause of Patriotism is a passion of all Masons. In fact, the roots and symbols of American patriotism have their birth in Freemasonry. The precepts and teachings of Freemasonry helped shape the birth of this nation and are exhibited by the many notable patriots listed on the roles of lodges across America and Europe. The lodge rolls include founding fathers, presidents, congressmen, representatives, governors, commissioners, mayors, and council members. The lodge rolls also include many Congressional Medal of Honor recipients, Generals, Admirals, unit commanders, line officers, and a wealth of the enlisted ranks. All are dedicated to the freedom granted to all mankind by the Great Architect of the Universe. Furthering the guarantee of freedom and the expression of one’s personal belief, the lodge rolls have notable religious leaders, civil-rights leaders, astronauts, inventors, industrialists, poets, authors, and entertainers that are all dedicated to the Semper Fidelis Lodge No. 680 Program ~ Pledge of Allegiance – 12 June 2013 Page 1 common cause of personal freedom of all mankind. Masons, in particular, were instrumental in inspiring many of our patriotic symbols and the means for expressing our patriotism.
    [Show full text]