|
|
Signup to Pray |
You must log in.
|
|
Pray for Me |
You must log in.
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted by: Shawn on Friday, January 14, 2005 - 05:24 PM
|
 |
 |
WASHINGTON (AP) -- A federal judge heard arguments Thursday in the case of an atheist who wants to prevent a Christian minister from reciting a prayer at President Bush's inauguration.
Michael Newdow -- best known for trying to remove "under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance -- told U.S. District Judge John Bates that allowing an overtly Christian prayer at the Jan. 20 ceremony violates the Constitution by forcing him to accept unwanted religious beliefs.
Attorneys representing Bush and his inaugural committee argued that prayers have been widely accepted at inaugurals for more than 200 years and that Bush's decision to have a minister recite the invocation is a personal choice the court has no power to prevent.
Bates said he would issue a ruling Friday.
During the two-hour hearing, Bates questioned both sides vigorously but expressed doubt that a court could order the president not to include a prayer when he takes the oath of office.
"Is it really in the public interest for the federal courts to step in and enjoin prayer at the president's inauguration?" Bates asked.
Much of the hearing did not focus on the merits of Newdow's legal claims, but instead centered on whether the lawsuit should be thrown out because Newdow lost a similar case in California last year.
The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in 2003 that Newdow did not suffer "a sufficiently concrete and specific injury" when he opposed prayers from being recited at Bush's first inauguration.
Newdow -- arguing his case via telephone conference hookup from California -- said his case is different this time because he actually has a ticket to attend the inauguration. That atmosphere, he said, is more coercive than four years ago, when he planned to watch the ceremony on television.
Justice Department lawyer Edward White scoffed at that claim, saying the issues in the two cases are the same and that Newdow still has not shown how he would be injured by hearing the prayer.
George Terwilliger, appearing for the inaugural committee, said the details of the ceremony are not officially sanctioned government action but merely the personal choice of the president.
Newdow won widespread publicity two years ago when he persuaded the 9th Circuit to rule that the separation of church and state was violated when public school students pledged to God. But the Supreme Court later threw out the ruling, saying Newdow could not lawfully sue because he did not have custody of his elementary school-age daughter, on whose behalf he sued.
Newdow refiled the pledge suit in Sacramento federal court this month, naming eight other plaintiffs who are custodial parents or the children themselves.
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
|
