supreme court wimps out...

[acroyear]

rather than decide the *important* issue that we really need to have resolved in this particular day and age, the court wimped out. they rejected the whole case of the "under god" thing, deciding that the father didn't have a strong enough custody situation to warrent even filing the case in the first place.

"Under God" stands, on a technicality, because the judges up there decided it was more important to not piss off half the country (whichever half they might have voted for) than to actually make a decision they were appointed to actually make.

details (without my commentary, of course) can be found at pretty much any news site. standard press (aka, "the liberal media") will complain about the lack of true resolution. i wouldn't be surprised if murdock's fox news called it a "moral victory".

Comments

[neadods.livejournal.com]

Early headlines on Google news searching "Nednow" show a split - half say that the Pledge won't be changed, half discuss how Nednow just won a $1 million libel suit against a preacher. Searching "Pledge," I note that the AP article that's hitting the wires starts with "The Supreme Court at least temporarily preserved the phrase "one nation, under God," in the Pledge of Allegiance..."

That "temporarily" seems to acknowlege that it's not over yet. The path is clear for another determined atheist. Or group of non-monotheists; a group stands a better chance than a single guy, no matter how determined.

What I don't understand is how this reverses the 9th Court ruling. Only 3 justices came out in support of "under God." So how did the prohibition against it in the West come down?

[acroyear70.livejournal.com]

it reverses it because the declaration is that the case couldn't have legally been filed in the first place. Therefore ALL decisions related to it are null and void and things revert to what they were before the case ever went to its first hearing.

yeah, somebody else could sue and start the process over again, but the result of this case in the california courts is NOT relevant in any way. the whole thing has to be retried from the very beginning, with all the money involved in doing so.

[neadods.livejournal.com]

the whole thing has to be retried from the very beginning, with all the money involved in doing so.

Not to mention the hate mail, etc. (Which is why a group stands a better chance; the crap will be spread out evenly.)

Still... I hope someday someone does.