LAW PUNDIT Monday, June 21, 2004 6/21/2004 11:47:00 PM [Home]
Supreme Court Decision on the Pledge of Allegiance Case Criticized
Supreme Court Decision on the Pledge of Allegiance Case Criticized
Marci Hamilton has an excellent analysis at Find Law of the US Supreme Court decision in the Pledge of Allegiance Case.
See the LawPundit posting on this topic.
Hamilton - in our opinion correctly - notes that the Supreme Court made a serious error in sticking its nose into local child custody "standing" issues while trying to duck a decision on the proper and nationally significant legal issue of the "standing" of the phrase "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance under the Establishment Clause.
Hamilton writes:
"The federal courts, and in fact the federal government, simply do not deal with custody issues except in the rarest circumstances. The majority's decision was nothing short of hubris when it decided to reach out to determine what Newdow's rights are with respect to the religious education of his daughter. The folly of this decision could be felt in custody disputes around the nation."
We agree in many particulars with Hamilton's reasoning in her superbly written and - in our opinion - logically analyzed article.
Permalink : Andis Kaulins : 6/21/2004 11:47:00 PM
Supreme Court Decision on the Pledge of Allegiance Case Criticized
Supreme Court Decision on the Pledge of Allegiance Case Criticized
Marci Hamilton has an excellent analysis at Find Law of the US Supreme Court decision in the Pledge of Allegiance Case.
See the LawPundit posting on this topic.
Hamilton - in our opinion correctly - notes that the Supreme Court made a serious error in sticking its nose into local child custody "standing" issues while trying to duck a decision on the proper and nationally significant legal issue of the "standing" of the phrase "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance under the Establishment Clause.
Hamilton writes:
"The federal courts, and in fact the federal government, simply do not deal with custody issues except in the rarest circumstances. The majority's decision was nothing short of hubris when it decided to reach out to determine what Newdow's rights are with respect to the religious education of his daughter. The folly of this decision could be felt in custody disputes around the nation."
We agree in many particulars with Hamilton's reasoning in her superbly written and - in our opinion - logically analyzed article.
Permalink : Andis Kaulins : 6/21/2004 11:47:00 PM
......Creative Commons License
