First Amendment topicsAbout the First Amendment
News Story
 
Court rejects atheist's challenge to 'In God We Trust'

By The Associated Press
06.13.06

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — A federal judge yesterday rejected a lawsuit from an atheist who said having the phrase "In God We Trust" on U.S. coins and dollar bills violated his First Amendment rights.

U.S. District Judge Frank C. Damrell Jr. said the minted words amounted to a secular national slogan that did not trample on Michael Newdow's non-religious views.

"There is no proper allegation that the government compelled plaintiff to affirm a repugnant belief in monotheism," Damrell said in dismissing the suit, Newdow v. Congress.

Newdow, a Sacramento doctor and lawyer, also is engaged in an ongoing effort to have the Pledge of Allegiance banned from public schools because it contains the words "under God."

Two years ago, the pledge fight reached the U.S. Supreme Court, which said in Elk Grove Unified School Dist. v. Newdow that the atheist lacked standing to bring the case because he didn't have custody of the daughter on whose behalf he brought the case.

But a Sacramento federal judge sided with Newdow in September after he filed an identical lawsuit on behalf of parents with children in three Sacramento-area school districts. The case is pending before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Informed of the "In God We Trust" decision yesterday, Newdow said he was not disappointed because it would give him an edge in an appeal.

Newdow sued Congress and several federal officials, claiming that by making money with "In God We Trust" on it the government was establishing a religion in violation of the First Amendment clause requiring separation of church and state. The phrase "excludes people who don't believe in God," he claimed.

"The placement of 'In God We Trust' on the coins and currency was clearly done for religious purposes and to have religious effects," Newdow wrote in the 162-page suit, which was filed last November.

Damrell disagreed, citing a 9th Circuit decision from 1970 that concluded the four words were a national motto that had "nothing whatsoever to do with the establishment of religion." Newdow had argued the appeals court decision was "wrongly decided."

"'Wrongly decided' or not, this court must and does ... follow 9th Circuit precedent," Damrell said.

Congress first authorized a reference to God on a two-cent piece in 1864. In 1955, the year after lawmakers added the words "under God" to the Pledge of Allegiance, Congress passed a law requiring all U.S. currency to carry the motto "In God We Trust."

Referring to that action in yesterday's decision, Damrell said that Congress could not be sued for adopting the law because it was a legitimate legislative activity.

Newdow filed the lawsuit five days after the U.S. Supreme Court rejected, without comment, a challenge to an inscription of "In God We Trust" on a North Carolina county government building.


Related

Federal judge to stay ruling in Pledge case

Announcement sets stage for Michael Newdow, California school districts to take dispute to 9th Circuit. 10.06.05

Justices sidestep 'In God We Trust' dispute
Supreme Court won't review 4th Circuit ruling allowing national motto on government building; meanwhile, Michael Newdow says he plans to challenge use of phrase on U.S. currency. 11.14.05

Newdow's libel lawsuit survives in court ruling
Atheist who challenged 'under God' in Pledge of Allegiance can proceed against preacher who accused him of perjury. 10.26.06

Student leaders drop Pledge of Allegiance at Calif. college
Orange Coast College's student trustees vote not to recognize the pledge at meetings, saying it inspires nationalism. 11.11.06

Calif. district votes to display 'In God We Trust' in classrooms
Bakersfield board decides 4-1 to highlight phrase in poster that will also feature portions of Constitution, Bill of Rights, Declaration of Independence. 11.08.07

Newdow seeks to bar references to God from inauguration
California atheist sues to remove phrase 'so help me God,' other religious references from presidential oath of office, block invocation prayer from Pastor Rick Warren. 12.31.08

Inaugural plans causing stir over religion
Barack Obama's choice of clergy for ceremonial prayers is under scrutiny like no other president-elect before him; meanwhile, atheist sues to strike 'so help me God' from oath. 01.15.09

Federal judge won't order Obama not to use 'God' in oath
Court also refuses request by group of atheists to block ministers from offering prayers at Jan. 20 inauguration. 01.16.09

Fighting over religion in 2006: Déjà vu all over again?
By Charles C. Haynes Intelligent design, Ten Commandments, Pledge of Allegiance, Bible courses and, yes, Christmas will continue to be contested. 01.08.06

Our motto risks becoming ‘Over God we fight’
By Charles C. Haynes Even something as innocuous as the 50th anniversary of “In God We Trust” is an occasion for culture warring. 07.23.06

Over God We Fight
By Charles C. Haynes Promoting 'In God We Trust' produces court cases rather than religious belief — because trusting in God is an act of faith, not a national slogan. 09.30.07

News summary page
View the latest news stories throughout the First Amendment Center Online.

print this   Print


Last system update: Saturday, January 24, 2009 | 18:40:34
 SEARCH  MORE
About this site
About the First Amendment
About the First Amendment Center
Video/RSS/podcasts
First Amendment programs
State of the First Amendment
reports

First Reports
Supreme Court
Experts
Columnists
First Amendment publications
First Amendment Center history
Glossary
Freedom Sings™
Events
First Amendment
Schools

Congressional Research Service reports
Guest editorials
FOI material
The First Amendment
Library

Lesson plans
freedomforum.org
Newseum
Contact us
Privacy statement
Related links