Newdow

Newdow v. Congress of the United States

Good Law
383 F. Supp. 2d 1229·2005 WL 2229873·2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19887
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaSeptember 14, 2005CIV. S-05-17LKK/DADCalifornia7,685 words

Opinion

Opinion

Karlton, J.

ORDER

Pending before the court are motions to dismiss in what is something of a cause celebre in the ongoing struggle as to the role of religion in the civil life of this nation. Below, I conclude that binding precedent requires a narrow resolution of the motions, one which will satisfy no one involved in that debate, but which accords with my duty as a judge of a subordinate court.

As is known by most everyone, plaintiff, Michael Newdow (“Newdow”), is an atheist whose daughter attends school in the Elk Grove Unified School District (“EGUSD”). He and two other sets of parents and their minor children bring suit to challenge the constitutionality of 4 U.S.C. § 4 , which codifies the wording of the Pledge of Allegiance, and the practices of four California public school districts requiring students to recite the Pledge. Plaintiffs bring suit against the United States of America, the United States Congress, and Peter LeFe-bre, a congressional officer (collectively “federal defendants”). The complaint also names as defendants the State of California, the Governor of California, California’s Education Secretary (collectively “state defendants”), and four local California public…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.