Attorney Commends Federal Judges' Decision Upholding Virginia Pledge Law
by Allie Martin
August 12, 2005
(AgapePress) - An attorney with the American Family Association Center for Law & Policy says a federal appellate court's decision to turn back a challenge to the Pledge of Allegiance is an example of thoughtful, well-reasoned judicial action. Earlier this week, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit rejected a challenge to a Virginia law requiring students to recite the Pledge of Allegiance. The lawsuit was filed by Edward Myers, a father of three who belongs to the Anabaptist Mennonite faith, a tradition that has condemned the mixture of church of state.
Suing on behalf of himself and his minor children, Myers maintained that reciting the Pledge, with its reference to "one nation under God," is a religious exercise prohibited by the U.S. Constitution. The Virginia law does not compel students to participate in the recitation and allows those who object to stand or sit in silence, but the plaintiff objected to the statute nevertheless.
The three-judge panel of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the lawsuit's claim that the Virginia law unconstitutionally promotes or establishes religion. Although the plaintiff's counsel argued that school children are likely to view the pledge as an affirmation of God's existence and "national subordination to God," the appellate court judges ruled that reciting the Pledge of Allegiance is a patriotic exercise rather than a religious one.
AFA Center for Law & Policy senior trial attorney Brian Fahling says the Fourth Circuit court's ruling is solid. "Because the students in the state of Virginia are permitted to opt out of the recitation," he explains, "there is no intrusion on anybody's religious beliefs or on their conscience, so I think it bodes well."
Fahling calls the panel's ruling "a common-sense opinion," and he commends the Fourth Circuit judges for it. "Even in the midst of this disastrous Establishment Clause jurisprudence the Supreme Court has handed us," the attorney says, "the court was able carve out, I think, just a great opinion in saying this isn't a religious exercise. Merely because the words 'under God' are in [the Pledge] doesn't translate it into that. It really takes the form more of a political creed, if you will."
The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals failed to find any Establishment Clause violation, a decision Fahling describes as "right on the mark." He says the court is to be commended for its "incisive and lucid reasoning." Myers' attorney, David Remes, says he and his client have not yet discussed whether to appeal the Fourth Circuit court's ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Allie Martin, a regular contributor to AgapePress, is a reporter for American Family Radio News, which can be heard online.
