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: An eleventh-hour presidential appointment and a community left in the dark
By Editorial Board | 21 hours agoFurthermore, it is hard to ignore that the unanimous vote elevating Beardsley to the University’s top role was undertaken by a Board that is seemingly not legally constituted.
NERO: The University must modernize the Lawn room application process
By Emma Nero | 2 days agoStudents vying for a Lawn room are left with the options of not signing an off-Grounds lease on the gamble of being accepted, or putting their name on a lease and risking financial or legal repercussions for removing their name.
LETTER: An alumnus and parent’s perspective on U.Va.’s presidential search process
By Tom Neale | 6 days agoThe critiques of Mahoney and the Board of Visitors are egregious double standards that I believe are motivated by political differences with Mahoney and the Board.
