Case Brief:
Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow
FACTS: The Respondent Michael Newdow’s daughter attended school at the Elk Grove Unified School District in California. Elk Grove teachers began each school day with a recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance, including the words “under God” added by a 1954 Congressional Act. Newdow sued in federal district court in California, arguing that this violates the establishment clause of the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY:
The District Court: dismissed Newdow’s complaint for lack of standing.
The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals: reversed, holding that he did have standing, and that the School District’s policy requiring it to be recited violated the First Amendment’s establishment clause.
The U.S. Supreme Court: reversed, Newdow did not have standing
ISSUE:
1. Does Michael Newdow have standing to challenge as unconstitutional?
2. Does a public school district policy that requires teachers to lead willing students in reciting the Pledge of Allegiance, which includes the words "under God," violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment?
HOLDING:
1. No, Michael Newdow does not have standing to bring suit.
2. Because Newdow had no standing, the Court failed to reach the constitutional question
RULE: The Article III standing that the Plaintiff must show that the conduct of which he complains has caused him to suffer an “injury of fact,” and also that “domestic relations of husband and wife, parent and child, belong to the laws of the States.”
REASONING: The Supreme Court found that Newdow did not have standing to bring suit because he did not have sufficient custody over his daughter. Justice Stevens Wrote “When hard questions of domestic relations are sure to affect the outcome, the prudent course is for the federal court to stay its hand rather than reach out to resolve a weighty question of federal constitutional law.” He also said that “having been deprived under California law of the right to sue as next friend, Newdow lacks prudential standing to bring this suit in federal court.” Since the court found that Newdow did not have standing, the Court failed to reach the constitutional question.
CONCURRENCE: Chief Justice Rehnquist, and Justices Sandra O’Connor and Clarence Thomas all wrote concurrences, stating that requiring teachers to lead the Pledge is constitutional.
You May Also Find These Documents Helpful
-
Holding: Speelman should have been granted a preliminary injunction, and her substansive and procedural due process was indeed…
- 505 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays -
However, there are several interesting differences between these cases that I believe should prohibit the court from following the Hayes v. Oakridge case as precedent. First, is that the hypothetical case, is governed by the laws of the state of Indiana, the state in which John was domiciled. This is important, but not necessarily enough to change the Indiana court’s ruling from the Hayes v. Oakridge case. Nevertheless, I will make note of it, since the courts in Indiana are generally not required to follow the decisions of the courts of another state, though it is typical for the courts of one state to look to decisions of other states as influential statements of what the law should be in the state making the decision, where prior precedent…
- 789 Words
- 4 Pages
Good Essays -
Pennsylvania and Rhode Island had statutes that allowed the state to pay for parts of non-secular, non-public education such as teachers instructional materials, salaries, and textbooks for religious subjects. The appellants in Pennsylvania believed that this was violating the separation of church and state described in the First Amendment. In the Rhode Island case, the appellees sued to have the statute in question declared unconstitutional by arguing that it violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The district court found in favor of the appellees and held that the statute violated the First Amendment.…
- 462 Words
- 2 Pages
Satisfactory Essays -
Facts: In Santa Fe, Texas, students were elected by their classmates to give pre-game prayers at high school football games over the loud speaker that were mainly Christian. A Catholic and a Mormon family felt this was a violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment of the Constitution. The school district has always done pre-game invocations before each game however while the case was pending the school district changed their policy, still permitting student led prayer but not requiring them as they were before. The District Court ordered that only nonsectarian and nonproselytizing prayers could be…
- 457 Words
- 2 Pages
Satisfactory Essays -
In 1954, Congress amended Title 36 of the United States Code by adding “under God” to the Pledge of Allegiance. California Education Code section 52720 requires appropriate patriotic exercises to be practiced in every public elementary school every day. Elk Grove Unified School District’s policy required the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance every day pursuant to section 52720 of the California Education Code. Michael A. Newdow’s daughter attended a public school in the Elk Grove Unified School District in California. Each day, teachers at the school led the students in a voluntary recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance, which included the words “under God.” Newdow, being an atheist and divorced with “shared physical custody” of his daughter, challenged the constitutionality of Elk Grove Unified School District’s requirement that teachers lead their classes in reciting the Pledge of Allegiance. Newdow filed suit in federal district court in California claiming that Elk Grove’s recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance violated the 1st Amendment Establishment Clause to the Constitution due to the words “under God” being included and thus, his daughter was being subjected to religious indoctrination. The district court dismissed Newdow’s claim on the ground that he lacked legal standing because he was divorced from Sandra Banning, the mother of his daughter, and that he did not have legal custody of his daughter. The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed the lower court’s ruling, deciding that Newdow did have holding as a parent to sue and that the school district’s policy violated the establishment clause. The school district appealed the decision to the Supreme Court, which granted review.…
- 1101 Words
- 5 Pages
Good Essays -
On April 26, 1983, Matthew Fraser gave a speech nominating another student for an elected position. The speech was given to about 600 fourteen year olds that chose to attend this assembly. The speech contained sexual innuendo. Before giving the speech Fraser received advise from several teachers that he should change the speech or not give one at all. But he refused to take their advice (2). The next day, he was called in to an administrative office and was suspended for three days and was told he would not be able to give his speech during graduation even though he was at the time the salutatorian. The family of Fraser filed a grievance with the Pierce County school board, but the officer upheld the suspension. In response, to that decision Matthew’s father filed a case against the school district. The District Court ruled that the student’s First Amendment right was infringed upon. The students was awarded a monetary judgment and allowed to give his graduation speech. Later, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the judgment of the District Court (4). Later, the US Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals in a 7-2 vote to reinstate the suspension, saying that the school district's policy did not violate the First Amendment (3).…
- 663 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays -
The second question of the case is whether or not the reading of the prayer violates the Establishment Clause. The Establishment Clause prohibits laws that respect an establishment of religion by congress. Some parents argued that by having the students and teachers recite the prayer, the public was showing that the government was “respecting an establishment of religion”.…
- 1065 Words
- 5 Pages
Good Essays -
Three years later, the controversy appeared in court again as West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette. The case was brought forward on behalf of the Jehovah’s Witnesses. At this point in time, three of the justices that had ruled on the prior case had been replaced. In a 6-3 decision, the court overruled the prior Gobitis resolution and determined that the former resolution violated the students’ freedom of speech and freedom of religion which are guaranteed in the Bill of Rights of the Constitution of the U.S. Although it is up to schools and the government to teach students about patriotism and the importance of our American flag, it is not the role of our public school system to punish students that choose to not participate in the pledge.…
- 289 Words
- 2 Pages
Satisfactory Essays -
First the court did know if the wife would be an appropriate witness if the crimes were against her. Second the violence was unprovoked. The wife didn’t do anything wrong to deserves to get struck with a switch. The new scope of the precedent is that if the husband had no reason to hurt his wife, then he should not have engaged in the vicious acts. 5.…
- 507 Words
- 3 Pages
Satisfactory Essays -
As a very high priced and respected legal advisor I would advise Ms. Charmander of her legal rights. I would also advise her of her duties as a teacher. In this scenario Ms. Charmander has an academic freedom to decide what she wants to teach in her classroom. She also feels as if the Pledge of Allegiance is promoting the endorsement of religion. Which is not allowed in a public school setting. Her students also have a 1st amendment right to hear and say the Pledge of Allegiance. The state cannot prevent people from practicing or expressing themselves as long as they are not disruptive. Ms. Charmander also has the responsibility to teach what the school has set in their curriculum. Teachers are generally allowed some of their own freedoms in how they deliver their curriculum. In this case it seems if the school is set on this particular subject. In fact…
- 546 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays -
B. In the case of Engel v. Vitale, the Board of Regents for the State of New York approved a short, voluntary prayer to be recited at the start of school each day. A group of parents whose children attended the School District disagreed with this religious practice and argued that the reading of a nondenominational prayer at the start of the school day violates the "establishment of religion" clause…
- 1310 Words
- 6 Pages
Better Essays -
This case raised issue on whether placing a religious monument on state property violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The Lemon Test, established in precedent Lemon V. Kurtzman, concluded that to survive an Establishment Clause challenge a policy 1) must have a secular purpose; 2) must have a principal or primary effect that doesn’t advance or inhibit religion; and 3) must not foster excessive government entanglement with religion” (Blazing).…
- 338 Words
- 2 Pages
Good Essays -
"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands; one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all." The Pledge of Allegiance, written in 1892 by Francis Bellamy has undergone quite an evolution. It was made mandatory in schools by the US Supreme Court in 1940 but was withdrawn three years later, was congressionally recognized as national pledge in 1942 and was further augmented with words “under god” in 1954. Originally meant to be a promise or oath of loyalty to the Republic of United States of America and an expression of patriotism, it has become a lightning rod of controversy, heated passions and lawsuits. The question is whether the Pledge of Allegiance with the words “under god” violates the protections of religious freedoms enshrined in the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment? The phrase “under god” does not violate the freedom of religion found in the first amendment. This Clause dictates, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise…
- 494 Words
- 2 Pages
Good Essays -
When they added the phrase “Under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance, it struck a controversy. Which some people argued it violates their First Amendment. But the phrase reflects America’s civic culture and it isn’t necessarily a religious statement. Though, people has the right to say the Pledge omitting the phrase, thus not violating their freedom of religion.…
- 382 Words
- 2 Pages
Good Essays -
Along with time, several American’s viewpoints changed, one including religion. Unfortunately, the Pledge was no longer the simplistic faith to the country. Requiring the recital of the Pledge in the school systems instigated more controversial events. The ongoing contest against the usage of the Pledge led the House of Representatives to construct the Pledge Protections Act of 2005. The bill intended “to amend the federal judicial code to deny jurisdiction to any federal court, including controversies involving the Pledge of Allegiance” (H.R. 2389 (109th)).…
- 1397 Words
- 6 Pages
Powerful Essays