III 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 243 

Expressing Support for the Pledge of Allegiance. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 15, 2005 

Mr. TALENT (for himself, Mr. FRIST, Mr. SANTORUM, Mr. MCCONNELL, Mr. 

CORNYN, Mr. BROWNBACK, Mr. LOTT, Mr. GRASSLEY, Mr. MARTINEZ, 

Mr. BUNNING, Mr. ALLEN, Mr. BURNS, Mr. STEVENS, Mr. DEMINT, Mr. 

THUNE, Mr. ENSIGN, and Mr. KYL) submitted the following resolution; 

which was considered and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing Support for the Pledge of Allegiance. 

Whereas on June 26, 2002, a 3-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in Newdow v. United States 

Congress that the words ‘‘under God’’ in the Pledge of 

Allegiance violate the Establishment Clause of the United 

States Constitution when recited voluntarily by students 

in public schools; 

Whereas on March 4, 2003, the United States Senate passed 

a resolution disapproving of the Ninth Circuit’s decision 

in Newdow by a vote of 94–0; 

Whereas on June 14, 2004, the Supreme Court of the United 

States dismissed the case, citing the plaintiff’s lack of 

standing; 
2 

•SRES 243 ATS

Whereas on January 3, 2005, the same plaintiff and 4 other 

parents and their minor children filed a second suit in 

the Eastern District of California challenging the words 

‘‘under God’’ in the Pledge of Allegiance; 

Whereas on September 14, 2005, the Eastern District of 

California declined to dismiss the new Newdow case, 

holding that the Ninth Circuit’s earlier ruling that the 

words ‘‘under God’’ in the Pledge of Allegiance violate 

the Establishment Clause was still binding precedent; 

Whereas this country was founded on religious freedom by 

the Founding Fathers, many of whom were deeply religious; 

Whereas the First Amendment to the United States Constitution embodies principles intended to guarantee freedom 

of religion both through the free exercise thereof and by 

prohibiting the Government from establishing a religion; 

Whereas Congress, in 1954, added the words ‘‘under God’’ to 

the Pledge of Allegiance; 

Whereas Congress, in 1954, believed it was acting constitutionally when it revised the Pledge of Allegiance; 

Whereas the Pledge of Allegiance has for more than 50 years 

included references to the United States flag, to our 

country having been established as a union ‘‘under God’’, 

and to this country being dedicated to securing ‘‘liberty 

and justice for all’’; 

Whereas the 107th Congress overwhelmingly passed a resolution disapproving of the panel decision of the Ninth Circuit in Newdow, and overwhelmingly passed legislation 

recodifying Federal law that establishes the Pledge of Allegiance in order to demonstrate Congress’s opinion that 
3 

•SRES 243 ATS

voluntarily reciting the Pledge in public schools is constitutional; 

Whereas the Senate believes that the Pledge of Allegiance, as 

revised in 1954, as recodified in 2002, and as recognized 

in a resolution in 2003, is a fully constitutional expression of patriotism; 

Whereas the National Motto, patriotic songs, United States 

legal tender, and engravings on Federal buildings also 

refer to ‘‘God’’; and 

Whereas in accordance with decisions of the United States 

Supreme Court, public school students are already protected from being compelled to recite the Pledge of Allegiance: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, 

2 SEC. 1. That the Senate strongly disapproves of the 

3 September 14, 2005, decision by the United States Dis4 trict Court for the Eastern District of California in 

5 Newdow, et al. v. The Congress of the United States of 

6 America, et al. 

7 SEC. 2. That the Senate authorizes and instructs the 

8 Senate Legal Counsel to continue to cooperate fully with 

9 the Attorney General in this case in order to vigorously 

10 defend the constitutionality of the Pledge of Allegiance. 

Æ