Will the SCOTUS vote WITH the POA Plaintiff to Give W a Wedge Issue?

[stopbush]

I'm thinking that the SCOTUS may well side with the guy who brought the suit against the "under God" phrase in the Pledge of Allegiance. Only 8 members of the Court are hearing the case. If it ends in a 4-4 deadlock, then the circuit court ruling that found that under God must be removed will stand. In this scenario, the atheists win and the SCOTUS gets to wash their hands of having to make a decision via a tacit non-endorsement endorsement of the "lib'rul" circuit court's verdict.

Result: activist lib'rul courts are evil and are attacking our country, atheists are running the country, SCOTUS tried but failed, vote for W...he believes in God!!

Whaddaya think?

[jsw_81]

1. It would definitely give Bush a bounce if they rule against 'Under God'

But only temporarily. If the economy is still in the toilet and our boys are still coming back from Iraq in caskets, Bush will lose in the fall. The Republicans will whine and scream about gays and God and guns just like they did in 1992, but it will be too little too late.

BTW, I hope Newdow wins (even though Kerry does not).

[Rufus T. Firefly]

2. When Scalia recused himself, that's the first thing I thought of.

I thought "He WANTS them to rule against the Pledge as it stands, so that there's something for Smirk to run on."

[happyslug]

3. I have the same fears

A better solution is for the "Liberals" on the court is to vote that the Phase "Under God" is a meaningless phase and has no more religious significance than having Christmas Decoration on a Public Building.

Once that is done, than rule that the Pledge is NOT an Oath, but a "Pledge" of Allegiance to the UNITED STATES not to GOD. Thus the phase "Under God" is nothing more than a recital, a secular ritual having no legal or religious significance. Given those findings of law, to dismiss the case as NOT being in violation of the separation of Church and State.

This would "restore" the Pledge but also say that it has no religious significance and the Phase "Under God" means nothing. It ends the debate, some people will not like it, other will hate it, but it removes the whole Pledge issue off the plate (at least for this election).

Another possibility would be for the court to "Blue Pencil" the Pledge to make it fit the First Amendment. Just like Congress could rewrite the Pledge in 1954, the Court could re-write it again. The rationale behind the re-write would be to avoid "meaningless phases" and to return the Pledge to its original wording. i.e.

I Pledge Allegiance to My Flag
and to the Republic for which its stands
One Country, indivisible,
with liberty, Justice and equality for all.

Such a Pledge follows want the original author wrote (or would have written, he kept out Equality do to fears of the Pledge being rejected) not the almost mind numbing ritual the Pledge became with the changes of "My Flag" to "The Flag of the United States of America" and "One Country, indivisible" to "One Country, under God, Indivisible". Meaningless phases to Grade School Children, and by the time the child is in High School so often repeated as to remain meaningless.

[fujiyama]

4. If the SC were to rule against the line...

and I find it unlikely they will, Kerry will speak against the ruling (and I will disagree but it is politically necessary), and will promise to appoint moderates on the bench, so I don't think it will make a huge impact.

[zoeyfong]

5. Only if the Dems mismanage it, which of course they will.

The democratic party has no concept of what it is to stand on principle, when that principle is not popular, or to make a persuasive case and bring people over to their side, or at least show some strength of charcter and conviction, and hopefully win respect that way.

[DaveSZ]

6. I thought about this the other day as well.

I'm also worried it could hand Bush another stupid wedge issue, but as an above poster said, if you have no record to run on wedge issues can only go so far.

Of course in terms of my own beliefs, I think they should return the pledge to its original state.


I also agree many leaders of our party are limp-wristed pussies.

(not so much Kerry)

:)