Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

House action on the Pledge of Allegiance

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    House action on the Pledge of Allegiance

    Regardless of one's position on the pledge, the flag, God or the United States of America, this is quite alarming.

    The House, in its infinite wisdom has decided that the Supreme Court should not even be able to hear certain cases.

    I ain't no lawyer, but this seems quite out of whack with the idea of having three brances of Government. Last time I checked, the Legislative Branch writes legislation and the Judicial Branch decides if the legislation is consitutional.

    This should not be a liberal or conservative issue. The idea here is that Congress would be able to pass legislation that it knows to be un-constitutional by passing laws before hand specifically exempting certain laws from being questioned.

    This is bad shit.



    http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/....ap/index.html


    WASHINGTON (AP) -- The House passed legislation Thursday that would prevent the Supreme Court from ruling on whether the words "under God" should be stricken from the Pledge of Allegiance.

    In a politically and emotionally charged debate six weeks before Election Day, Democrats said majority Republicans were debasing the Constitution to force a vote that could hurt Democrats at the ballot box.

    Supporters insisted Congress has always had authority to limit federal court jurisdiction, and the legislation is needed to protect an affirmation of religion that is part of the national heritage.

    The bill, which the House approved, 247-173, would prohibit federal courts, including the Supreme Court, from hearing cases involving the pledge and its recitation and would prevent federal courts from striking the words "under God" from the pledge.

    The legislation has little chance of advancing in the Senate this year, but it laid down another marker for politicians seeking to differentiate themselves from their election opponents on volatile social issues of the day. Other "wedge" issues that have come up or may arise before the election include gay marriage and flag-burning.

    In June, the Supreme Court dismissed, on a technicality, a 2002 federal court decision that the religious reference made the pledge unconstitutional.

    Rep. Todd Akin, R-Missouri., who wrote the amendment on legislation before the House on Thursday, said the outcome could be different if the high court rules on the substance, or "if we allow activist judges to start creating law and say that it is wrong to somehow allow schoolchildren to say 'under God' in the pledge."

    In such a scenario, Akin said, Congress will have "emasculated the very heart of what America has always been about."

    But Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-New York, said, "We're playing with fire here, we are playing with the national unity of this country" by undoing 200 years of federal judicial review and letting each state make its own interpretation of constitutional law.

    The vote paralleled another in July, when the House prevented federal courts from ordering states to recognize same-sex unions sanctioned in other states.

    "Far from violating the 'separation of powers,' legislation that leaves state courts with jurisdiction to decide certain classes of cases would be an exercise of one of the very 'checks and balances' provided for in the Constitution," said Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wisconsin, chairman of the Judiciary Committee.

    But many Democrats said the real objective of Thursday's debate was to force them into an unpopular vote just weeks before the election. Aside from the constitutional issue, a large percentage of Americans, and almost all members of Congress, think "under God" should stay in the pledge.

    "This bill has been brought to the floor to embarrass some members, so I respect whatever decisions they have to make in light of the motivations behind it," said Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-California In the end, 34 Democrats voted for the bill and six Republicans opposed it.

    A closer vote was on an amendment by Rep. Mel Watt, D-North Carolina., that would have returned the legislation to its original form, under which lower federal courts were barred from ruling on the pledge but the Supreme Court retained its authority.

    There is no direct precedent for making exceptions to the Supreme Court's appellate jurisdiction, said Rep. Judy Biggert, R-Illinois, who backed the original bill but opposed the changes.

    "The issue today may be the pledge, but what if the issue tomorrow is Second Amendment (gun) rights, civil rights, environmental protection, or a host of other issue that members may hold dear?" she asked.

    "Under God" has been part of the pledge since 1954, when Congress passed and President Eisenhower signed a law amending the pledge to include the phrase.
    The vast Universe!
    The Way of Aiki to to become
    The light of all mankind
    Opening all the world

    --O Sensei

    :gaygay:

    #2
    Damn, Gargonzo I think we can agree on this. While I dont like the ways some of the Federal Judge's are making decisions, it is essential to have a Supreme Court be able to keep its power. If they really want it that bad then they should get a constitional amendment passed. Whether or not to keep "under God" in the pledge of allegiance is not worth the risk to screwing up the whole constitution.

    Comment


      #3
      Rigante:

      Glad to hear it.

      Like I said, it's not a liberal or conservative issue.

      Consider the following:

      1) The Democrats get control of both Houses.

      2) Anti-gun nuts like me create a powerful lobby to put pressure on the Democrats in both Houses.

      3) The House passes legislation saying that the Court can't hear 2nd amendment cases.

      4) Congress passes legislation outlawing all gun ownership.


      This is an exagerrated example which could never happen, but the principle is disturbing.

      By the way, it's garbanzo, you fascist creep :D
      The vast Universe!
      The Way of Aiki to to become
      The light of all mankind
      Opening all the world

      --O Sensei

      :gaygay:

      Comment


        #4
        Well, the Supreme Court can rule that this law is unconstitutional, and then rule on the Pledge case. All someone needs to do is bring suit before the Supreme Court.
        "Quiet fool before I am kicking the butt!"
        -My three year old trash talking to me

        "Integrity can't be bought or sold---you either have it or you don't."
        -The Honky Tonk Man

        "If you can't be a shining example, at least be a dire warning."
        -My Father to me one day

        "No surprise. Until Aikido sheds its street-brawling, thuggish image, it'll never be mainstream."
        -Don Gwinn

        Comment


          #5
          Sorry, I have dyslexic fingers.:(

          Comment


            #6
            According to the article, the law would prevent the Supreme Court "from hearing cases involving the pledge and its recitation and would prevent federal courts from striking the words 'under God' from the pledge."

            Like I said, I ain't no lawyer, but that might include cases involving whether or not the Supreme Court can be prevented "from hearing cases involving the pledge and its recitation and would prevent federal courts from striking the words 'under God' from the pledge."
            The vast Universe!
            The Way of Aiki to to become
            The light of all mankind
            Opening all the world

            --O Sensei

            :gaygay:

            Comment


              #7
              You're surprised at this? Its been a long time coming brother. Its going to get worse.
              "All warfare is based on deception." -Sun Tzu, ca. 400BC


              Reverse punch Kiaii!!!

              Comment


                #8
                It's nice to have some one on this board to the left of me.
                The vast Universe!
                The Way of Aiki to to become
                The light of all mankind
                Opening all the world

                --O Sensei

                :gaygay:

                Comment


                  #9
                  He is not only left but he is really far gone!......Sorry PeeDee I just couldnt resist the cheap shot.;)

                  Comment


                    #10
                    I agree. That bill won't make it passed judicial review. I doubt it will even pass in the Senate. My guess is it will get tabled or killed in committee.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      This is just dangerous. If the constitution is allowed to be fucked with in this way, you open it for every nutball to make drastic changes. The checks and balances are in place for a fucking reason! This pisses me off to no end. I'd like to see the 2 words left right where they are .. but the way they went about it is just flat out wrong. If this passes, our nation as we know it, is over.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        If you think the constitution means much, the nation you know probably never existed.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Originally posted by Peter H.
                          Well, the Supreme Court can rule that this law is unconstitutional, and then rule on the Pledge case. All someone needs to do is bring suit before the Supreme Court.
                          Exactly.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Didn't you people pay attention in 8th grade US history?

                            Comment


                              #15
                              What's stopping the Supreme Court from finding the "no hear" law unconstitutional?

                              Comment

                              Collapse

                              Edit this module to specify a template to display.

                              Working...
                              X