H. Res. 132

In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

March 20, 2003.

Whereas on June 26, 2002, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, in Newdow v. United States Congress (292 F.3d

597; 9th Cir. 2002) (Newdow I), held that the Pledge of

Allegiance to the Flag as currently written to include the

phrase, ‘‘one Nation, under God’’, unconstitutionally endorses religion, that such phrase was added to the pledge

in 1954 only to advance religion in violation of the establishment clause, and that the recitation of the pledge in

public schools at the start of every school day coerces

students who choose not to recite the pledge into participating in a religious exercise in violation of the establishment clause of the first amendment;

Whereas on February 28, 2003, the Ninth Circuit Court of

Appeals amended its ruling in this case, and held (in

Newdow II) that a California public school district’s policy of opening each school day with the voluntary recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag

‘‘impermissibly coerces a religious act’’ on the part of

those students who choose not to recite the pledge and

thus violates the establishment clause of the first amendment;

Whereas the ninth circuit’s ruling in Newdow II contradicts

the clear implication of the holdings in various Supreme
2

•HRES 132 EH

Court cases, and the spirit of numerous other Supreme

Court cases in which members of the Court have explicitly stated, that the voluntary recitation of the Pledge of

Allegiance to the Flag is consistent with the first amendment;

Whereas the phrase, ‘‘one Nation, under God’’, as included

in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag, reflects the notion that the Nation’s founding was largely motivated by

and inspired by the Founding Fathers’ religious beliefs;

Whereas the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag is not a prayer

or statement of religious faith, and its recitation is not

a religious exercise, but rather, it is a patriotic exercise

in which one expresses support for the United States and

pledges allegiance to the flag, the principles for which the

flag stands, and the Nation;

Whereas the House of Representatives recognizes the right of

those who do not share the beliefs expressed in the pledge

or who do not wish to pledge allegiance to the flag to refrain from its recitation;

Whereas the effect of the ninth circuit’s ruling in Newdow II

will prohibit the recitation of the pledge at every public

school in 9 states, schooling over 9.6 million students,

and could lead to the prohibition of, or severe restrictions

on, other voluntary speech containing religious references

in these classrooms;

Whereas rather than promoting neutrality on the question of

religious belief, this decision requires public school districts to adopt a preference against speech containing religious references;

Whereas the constitutionality of the voluntary recitation by

public school students of numerous historical and found-
3

•HRES 132 EH

ing documents, such as the Declaration of Independence,

the Constitution, and the Gettysburg Address, has been

placed into serious doubt by the ninth circuit’s decision

in Newdow II;

Whereas the ninth circuit’s interpretation of the first amendment in Newdow II is clearly inconsistent with the

Founders’ vision of the establishment clause and the free

exercise clause of the first amendment, Supreme Court

precedent interpreting the first amendment, and any reasonable interpretation of the first amendment;

Whereas this decision places the ninth circuit in direct conflict with the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals which, in

Sherman v. Community Consolidated School District

(980 F.2d 437; 7th Cir. 1992), held that a school district’s policy allowing for the voluntary recitation of the

Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag in public schools does

not violate the establishment clause of the first amendment;

Whereas Congress has consistently supported the Pledge of

Allegiance to the Flag by starting each session with its

recitation;

Whereas the House of Representatives reaffirmed support for

the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag in the 107th Congress by adopting House Resolution 459 on June 26,

2002, by a vote of 416–3; and

Whereas the Senate reaffirmed support for the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag in the 107th Congress by adopting

Senate Resolution 292 on June 26, 2002, by a vote of

99–0: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that—
4

•HRES 132 EH

(1) the phrase ‘‘one Nation, under God,’’ in the

Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag reflects that religious

faith was central to the Founding Fathers and thus to

the founding of the Nation;

(2) the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance to the

Flag, including the phrase, ‘‘one Nation, under God,’’ is

a patriotic act, not an act or statement of religious faith

or belief;

(3) the phrase ‘‘one Nation, under God’’ should remain in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag and the

practice of voluntarily reciting the pledge in public school

classrooms should not only continue but should be encouraged by the policies of Congress, the various States,

municipalities, and public school officials;

(4) despite being the school district where the legal

challenge to the pledge originated, the Elk Grove Unified

School District in Elk Grove, California, should be recognized and commended for their continued support of

the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag;

(5) the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling in

Newdow v. United States Congress has created a split

among the circuit courts, and is inconsistent with the

Supreme Court’s interpretation of the first amendment,

which indicates that the voluntary recitation of the
5

•HRES 132 EH

pledge and similar patriotic expressions is consistent

with the first amendment;

(6) the Attorney General should appeal the ruling

in Newdow v. United States Congress, and the Supreme

Court should review this ruling in order to correct this

constitutionally infirm and historically incorrect holding;

and

(7) the President should nominate and the Senate

should confirm Federal circuit court judges who interpret the Constitution consistent with the Constitution’s

text.

Attest:

Clerk.