Letter: Court waited to avoid split ruling on pledge issue

Wednesday, June 23, 2004 | 9:13 a.m.

Mel Lipman makes excellent points in his June 19 letter, "Religion should not be imposed through pledge." The pledge today, altered by Congress in 1954 to include the phrase "under God," places the nation under the directions of God. Thus, when pledging allegiance to the United States of America, one also pledges the same allegiance to God.

Where I disagree with Mr. Lipman, however, is his concern that the Supreme Court sidestepped the issue of constitutionally of the phrase. Only eight justices heard the case -- Justice Antonin Scalia removed himself -- meaning the issue of constitutionally could have split 4-4. An evenly split decision reverts back to the opinion of the last ruling, in this case the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Since that decision only has effect in the 9th Circuit, the phrase would have been unconstitutional in that part of the country and constitutional in the rest.

By the majority opinion that the case lacked standing, the constitutionally remains the same. When the court revisits this issue of constitutionality, hopefully it will be able to render a majority opinion. And hopefully that opinion is that pledging allegiance to God violates the First Amendment's establishment of religion clause.

TERRY E. PEELE