CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
SENATE
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ORAL ARGUMENTS
Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, today the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in the case of Elk Grove Unified School District v. Michael Newdon. In Elk Grove, as my colleagues are very much aware, the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that the phrase "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance was unconstitutional. On an 8 to 0 vote the Supreme Court dismissed the case on procedural grounds. The ruling effectively preserves the right of children in public schools to recite the full Pledge of Allegiance. I applaud the decision of the Supreme Court.
It is truly right, and a bit ironic, that the Supreme Court issued its decision today on "Flag Day." Today is also the Golden Anniversary of congressional action that added the words "under God" to the Pledge of Allegiance.
I commend Chief Justice William Rehnquist and Judges Sandra Day O'Connor and Clarence Thomas who agreed, I believe properly, that the decision by the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit should be overturned not on the standing issue but instead because the words "under God" in the pledge do not violate the Constitution.
In response to the decision by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, I introduced Senate Resolution 71, which passed this body by a 94 to 0 vote. The resolution expressed the sense of the Senate that we "strongly disapprove" the decision of the Ninth Circuit and further instructed the Senate Legal Counsel to intervene in the case to defend the constitutionality of the words "under God" in the Pledge and if unable to intervene, to file an amicus curiae brief in support of continuing the constitutionality of the words "under God" in the Pledge.
I do not if my colleagues have had the opportunity to read the amicus curiae brief filed on behalf of the United States Senate. But I want to compliment Patricia Mack Bryan, the Senate Legal Counsel; Morgan J. Frankel, the Deputy Senate Legal Counsel; and Grant Vinik and Thomas Caballero, who are Assistant Senate Legal Counsels. I know they worked hard on the brief that was filed in December. They said in the brief:
The First Congress not only acknowledged a proper role for religion in public life, but did so at the very time it drafted the Establishment Clause.
They also noted that:
the Public manifestations of our Nation's religious heritage include "an unbroken history of official acknowledgement by all three branches of the government.
The mere reference to a Higher Being or God does not amount to a breach of the establishment clause of the Constitution.
The children born of this century will probably never appreciate the cold war and how in the early fifties, our country felt threatened by China, Russia and the spread of communism. It was in that historical context that Congress added the phrase "under God" to the pledge. As the Senate Legal Counsel related in their brief, the legislative history makes clear that Congress wanted to give credence to the fundamental truth that a Government deriving its powers from the consent of the governed must look to God for divine leadership.
There can be no doubt our Founding Fathers believed then, as I firmly believe today, that our Nation was founded on a fundamental belief in God, and that the actions we take here in the United States Senate and those of our children when they start their day in school each morning must be governed by the principles invoked by a belief in a dedication to our Country and to God, by whatever name you choose to make reference to that power and foundation.
I welcome the decision of the United States Supreme Court that preserves the right of our children and ourselves to say the words "under God" in our Pledge of Allegiance.