9th Circuit Hears Arguments In Pledge and Motto Cases

Yesterday the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in two cases brought by Sacramento attorney and doctor Michael Newdow--one challenging the inclusion of the phrase "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance and the other challenging the use of the motto "In God we Trust" on coins and currency. (See prior related posting.) The AP reports that in the pledge case, Terence Cassidy, a lawyer for the school district, argued that reciting the pledge is merely a "patriotic exercise". Newdow, urging equal respect for atheists, responded that the anger people demonstrate when it is proposed that the phrase be removed demonstrates its religious significance. Becket Fund president Kevin "Seamus" Hasson, arguing on behalf of school children supporting recitation of the Pledge, argued that "under God" has been used in American history to protect "God-given rights" that are not subject to government infringement. (Becket Fund release.) In the motto case, Justice Department lawyer Lowell Sturgill Jr. argued that "In God We Trust" is just a patriotic or ceremonial message. (See prior related posting.)