Establishment of Religion Clause Oral Arguments, Part 1
Dec 4, 2007
Follow Similar ProgramsThe U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco heard oral arguments in two cases on the use of God-related language.
In Newdow v. U.S. Congress the plaintiff, Sacramento physician, aethist, and .. Read More
In Newdow v. U.S. Congress the plaintiff, Sacramento physician, aethist, and .. Read More
The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco heard oral arguments in two cases on the use of God-related language.
In Newdow v. U.S. Congress the plaintiff, Sacramento physician, aethist, and lawyer Michael Newdow, sought to have “In God We Trust” removed from U.S. currency because of its reference to God. He argues that the motto violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment and is an unconstitutional endorsement of religion. A lower court had ruled against Newdow saying that the words amounted to a secular national slogan not an endorsement of religion.
In Newdow v. U.S. Congress the plaintiff, Sacramento physician, aethist, and lawyer Michael Newdow, sought to have “In God We Trust” removed from U.S. currency because of its reference to God. He argues that the motto violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment and is an unconstitutional endorsement of religion. A lower court had ruled against Newdow saying that the words amounted to a secular national slogan not an endorsement of religion.
