Michael A Newdow v Elk Grove Unified School District Case Paper

User Generated

bxuna4445

Other

Description

Religion and politics have to reword and paraphrase a paper not to long to make it look good


I will attach the document

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Case Name: Michael A. Newdow v. Elk Grove Unified School District Essential Facts: ● The California Education Code requires that public schools begin each school day with "appropriate patriotic exercises" and that "the giving of the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America shall satisfy" this requirement. . . . ● On June 14, 1954, Congress [added] the words "under God" after the word "Nation." The Pledge is currently codified as "I 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." ● Newdow is an atheist whose daughter attends a public elementary school in the Elk Grove Unified School District in California. ● In accordance with state law and a school district rule, Elk Grove teachers begin school days by leading the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance. Legal Issue: ​Does the addition of the words “under God” to the Pledge of Allegiance, and Elk Grove’s policy of following the California Education Code, which requires public schools to begin each school day with the recitation of the Pledge, violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment? Holding: Yes, the 1954 Act adding the words "under God" to the Pledge, and (2) Elk Grove School District's policy and practice of teacher-led recitation of the Pledge, with the added words included, violate the Establishment Clause. Reasoning of the Court The Law: The 1954 Act addition to the Pledge of Allegiance, “under God”, and and Elk Grove’s policy of following the California Education Code, which requires public schools to begin each school day with the recitation of the Pledge, violate the Establishment Clause under three different test: The Endorsement test, ​Lemon ​Test, and the coercion test. The Application of the Law to the Facts: ● Under the Endorsement test, the statement that the United States is a nation "under God" is an endorsement of religion. It is a profession of a religious belief, namely, a belief in monotheism. ● "The government must pursue a course of complete neutrality toward religion." The school district's practice of teacher-led recitation of the Pledge aims to inculcate in students a respect for the ideals set forth in the Pledge, and thus amounts to state endorsement of these ideals. ● The coercive effect of the Act is apparent from its context and legislative history, which indicate that the Act was designed to result in the daily recitation of the words "under God" in school classrooms. ● The policy is highly likely to convey an impermissible message of endorsement to some and disapproval to others of their beliefs regarding the existence of a monotheistic God. Therefore the policy fails the effects prong of ​Lemon​, and fails the ​Lemon t​ est. Both the policy and the Act fail the ​Lemon ​test as well as the endorsement and coercion tests. Religious Studies and Public Policy Questions: Why wasn’t the 1954 Act adding the words “under God” not immediately seen as a violation to the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. Rightly or Wrongly Decided: I think the Court rightly decided that the 1954 Act adding the words of “under God” to the Pledge of Allegiance, and Elk Grove’s daily leading of the Pledge of Allegiance is a violation of the Establishment Clause because it is a clear act of endorsement, and alienates people of polytheistic or non-religious belief. By requiring students of a public school to pledge to their nation over seen by one god is an action of establishing favoritism toward monotheistic religions. Dissenting Opinion: Circuit Judge Fernandez, dissented with the holding by stating his opinion that, “it comes to this: such phrases as "In God We Trust," or "under God" have no tendency to establish a religion in this country or to suppress anyone's exercise, or non-exercise, of religion, except in the fevered eye of persons who most fervently would like to drive all tincture of religion out of the public life of our polity. Those expressions have not caused any real harm of that sort over the years since 1791, and are not likely to do so in the future.”
Purchase answer to see full attachment
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer

Attached.

Running Head: MICHAEL A. NEWDOW V. ELK GROVE UNIFIED SCHOOL
DISTRICTESSENTIAL

Michael A. Newdow v. Elk Grove Unified School District Essential
Student Name
Institution Affiliation

1

MICHAEL A. NEWDOW V. ELK GROVE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT ESSENTIAL

2

Facts:


According to the California Education Code, public schools ought to start their school
day through an “appropriate patriotic exercise” seething fluffed by reciting the “Pledge of
Allegiance.”



In its original form written in 1892, the Pledge of Allegiance read as follows: "I pledge
allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with
liberty and justice for all," however, it has unde...


Anonymous
Very useful material for studying!

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4

Similar Content

Related Tags