Bluenose

Yes has sliped to 38% No is up to 62% <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />

GunnerJ

Anyone have a transcript of Hannity and Colmes?

hezekiah jones

Kennedy and Souter. Kennedy wrote in County of Allegheny v. ACLU:

This is quoted in the Ninth Circuit's opinion, which is one of the reasons that make this decision so compelling. Despite Ann Coulter's "bet" made a while ago on Hardball, two of these three judges were appointed by Republicans, the author of the decision by Nixon, and the (partial) dissenter by Bush I. The other judge is a Carter appointee.

There are two ways this decision could be overturned, one, by the Ninth Circuit itself en banc. Here is a webpage that gives the Ninth Circuit's apparent political persuasions:

<a href="http://www.appellate-counsellor.com/profiles.htm#Circuit_Judges" target="_blank">Ninth Circuit Judges</a>

I don't know how the en banc panel is selected from this list of Circuit Judges and Senior Circuit Judges. Perhaps someone could enlighten me.

Then of course there is the Supreme Court. As you point out, Rehnquist, Scalia, and Thomas are lost causes. O'Connor's own establishment clause opinions are quoted throughout the Ninth Circuit's opinion, so she would effectively have to overrule herself. Kennedy's view is fairly apparent from the above quotation, I believe. It practically refers to Newdow's case. Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer, and Stevens would likely be on our side.

I am not at all convinced this decision will be overturned. The only objections I've heard so far are either purely emotional or completely irrelevant to the narrowness of this opinion, which expressly invalidates the 1954 Act of Congress that amended the Pledge.

My prediction is this ruling will survive.

[Fixed URL]

[ June 26, 2002: Message edited by: hezekiah jones ]</p>

RufusAtticus

I just read the court decision and I don't see how anyone can find a hole in it.

Win one for the Bill of Rights!

Bluenose

When the dust settles only the 9 supremes will will be casting the final vote.

Darwin's Finch

I'm sure many of you are aware of Rev. Joshua Villines, who has lately posted here but is more often to be found engaging the conservatives at BaptistBoard. With his kind permission, I reprint his response to a query I e-mailed to him regarding whether we can expect a statement from the more moderate/liberal Baptist sects in support of the Court's decision. His response:

"You can expect strong support from the following:

-Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs
-The Alliance of Baptists
-Baptist Peace Fellowship of North America

and lukewarm support from:

-The Cooperative Baptist Fellowship
-The American Baptist Churches"

Perhaps this is the path to take, folks. Atheists/agnostics are too numerically insignificant to make a dent. However, there are a number of religious bodies in this country who take constitutional protections seriously. This might be a golden opportunity for nontheists and the more reasonable wings of believers to join in a common cause. If anyone knows mainstream clergy who might also be disturbed by the possible repurcussions of this decision, now might be the time to drop a note and get them on board. I would also be most interested in seeing which other denominational organizations are prepared to stand up for this issue.

Methos

It will probably be put up on <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/hannityandcolmes/index.html" target="_blank">the Hannity and Colmes website</a> tomorrow.

Eric

Principia

An interview with <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2002/LAW/06/26/Newdow.cnna/index.html" target="_blank">Newdow</a>. My concern is that he comes off a little fanatic, uncompromising. The media may have succeeded thus far in portraying the underlying reason for this suit unfavorably.

[ June 26, 2002: Message edited by: Scientiae[retired] ]</p>

ManM

"Newdow: My daughter is in the lawsuit because you need that for standing. I brought this case because I am an atheist and this offends me, and I have the right to bring up my daughter without God being imposed into her life by her schoolteachers. So she did not come and say she was ostracized."

Am I to understand that he used his daughter as a front?

[ June 26, 2002: Message edited by: ManM ]</p>

Writer@Large

Yeah. There are vibes of O'Hair there, for sure.

--W@L