Since last June, when the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Pledge of Allegiance is unconstitutional because it contains the words "under God," the nation has hotly debated the precise meaning of this phrase and all of the implications that go along with it.
The two 9th Circuit Court judges who wrote the majority opinion weren't kooky when they made their decision -- their arguments were based on historical circumstances and a careful, conservative interpretation of the Constitution. Their reasoning, however, is ultimately shortsighted and fails to take into account the so-called "ceremonial deism" that pervades American patriotism and culture.
Last Tuesday the 9th Circuit granted a 90-day stay on their original ruling, anticipating a probable Supreme Court hearing on the issue in late April. If Michael Newdow had gotten his way, however, 9.6 million schoolchildren in nine Western states would have stopped reciting the Pledge of Allegiance as of yesterday -
Read More
EDITORIAL: Trust in U.Va.’s governance begins with candor
By Editorial Board | 20 hours agoWhen transparency becomes a tool rather than a principle, governance itself becomes a performance rather than a practice.
KING: Backroom agreements have no place at U.Va.
By Michael King | 6 days agoThe University’s agreement with the Trump administration reeks not only because of its terms, but also for the method in which it was composed.
A statement from 181 concerned faculty on the Faculty Senate’s Nov. 14 resolution
By Concerned Faculty | November 24, 2025Continuing the search now would be all the proof needed to conclude that the Board and Mahoney are acting not in the University’s best interests but pursuant to some other agenda, if further proof were needed.
