California court rules on pledge of allegiance

[TheKid]

Apparantly there are some logical people in Northern California. Who would have thought this would come out of the ninth circut?

http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2010/03/ninth-circuit-upholds-pledge-of.php

[Osceola]

I'm glad they ruled in favor of the pledge.

[Heart Stopper]

Glad to hear it!

[Bill]

It's interesting that they ruled it was a patriotic expression, and not religious. I'll take the ruling however it's justified, considering where the court sits.

The also ruled "In God we trust" is OK on coins.

[Nate Riley]

I wish the court (even better the voters of the state) would tell Michael Newdow to quit wasting their time and money!

[tvc184]

The uber liberal 9th has decided (for a change) that merely mentioning "God" does not establish a religion.

I am surprised that they actually arrived at such a relatively simple conclusion.

[MKD45]

nice!

[pacetiger]

I believe there will be a special place in Hell for that fella newdow if he dont repent from his ways!

[NBK75]

Things are a changin..... some for good,some for bad.... chalk 1 up for the good

[TheKid]

I wonder if this will mean that we can appeal all of the 10 commandment rulings that removed the ten commandments from court houses and stuff like that.

[tvc184]

I wonder if this will mean that we can appeal all of the 10 commandment rulings that removed the ten commandments from court houses and stuff like that.

No. Each circuit court only deals with the rulings in that circuit. This 9th Circuit ruling only has an effect on the states of CA, WA, OR, MT, ID, NV and AZ.

Any different ruling from another circuit court still stands unless it is overturned by the Supreme Court at which time it makes a ruling for the entire country.

There are several conflicting rulings on different laws between different circuit (or state) courts. Until it reaches the highest court (if ever) then the lower court ruling stands. The ruling in the 9th has no effect on contrary rulings in other areas so is no grounds for an appeal based on this case.

It is always possible to appeal a ruling to the higher court but it won't be based on this case.

I hope that Micheal Newdow appeals this one to the US Supreme Court and they grant review. Then maybe we can get a ruling that covers the entire country and I am fairly certain the ruling in the 9th would be allowed to stand from the USSC.

[HNT ETX]

glad to hear it.

[mnsmokepole]

Good deal Lucille

[Firefyter]

Sweet, BTW "Newdow" is Russian for A-- Clown!

[TheKid]

No. Each circuit court only deals with the rulings in that circuit. This 9th Circuit ruling only has an effect on the states of CA, WA, OR, MT, ID, NV and AZ.

Any different ruling from another circuit court still stands unless it is overturned by the Supreme Court at which time it makes a ruling for the entire country.

There are several conflicting rulings on different laws between different circuit (or state) courts. Until it reaches the highest court (if ever) then the lower court ruling stands. The ruling in the 9th has no effect on contrary rulings in other areas so is no grounds for an appeal based on this case.

It is always possible to appeal a ruling to the higher court but it won't be based on this case.

I hope that Micheal Newdow appeals this one to the US Supreme Court and they grant review. Then maybe we can get a ruling that covers the entire country and I am fairly certain the ruling in the 9th would be allowed to stand from the USSC.

What I was getting at is if this can be used a legal precedent for other courts to rule in similar cases like ten commandments in front a courthouse possibly in an appeal. Not as a blanket ruling.