Court to rule on place of God

US: Constitutional lawyers in Europe are watching closely a US Supreme Court case which reflects arguments about whether the…

US: Constitutional lawyers in Europe are watching closely a US Supreme Court case which reflects arguments about whether the word God should appear in the draft EU constitution.

The Supreme Court in Washington is expected to rule by the end of June whether the words "under God" should be removed from the Pledge of Allegiance recited in public schools.

The case goes to the heart of the role religion should play in a nation where the separation of church and state is central to public life, a cornerstone.

In a public hearing on Wednesday the judges seemed inclined to agree with Justice Sandra Day O'Connor to treat the phrase as ceremonial, like the motto "In God We Trust" on US currency, which a previous court decision said was not an illegal government endorsement of religion.

READ MORE

Representing the US government, Solicitor General Theodore Olson argued that the phrase "under God" is viewed as an "acknowledgement" of religion's role in the lives of America's founding fathers and was a "patriotic exercise", not an "endorsement".

The case was argued by Californian Dr Michael Newdow who said the words "under God" were inserted into the Pledge in 1954 after a campaign by the Catholic organisation the Knights of Columbus.

He cited a 1992 ruling in which the court found that prayers at non-compulsory school graduation ceremonies were unconstitutional because they used peer pressure to apply subtle compulsion.

Justice Anthony Kennedy questioned Newdow's legal right to bring the case on behalf of his fourth-grade daughter. The girl's mother, Sandra Banning, who has legal custody, is an evangelical Christian who supports the full wording which requires millions of students to "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."