State Attorneys General Oppose Challenge to Inauguration Ceremony
January 9, 2009
An update on the recently-filed lawsuit challenging the use of prayer and the addition of the words "so help me God" at this month’s Presidential Inauguration: yesterday all 50 state Attorneys General, led by Texas AG Greg Abbott and joined by the AG for the Virgin Islands, filed an amicus (friend-of-the-court) brief defending prayer and the addition of the words "so help me God" in the oath at Barack Obama’s inauguration. The brief argues : "Prayers and oaths invoking God have been incorporated into public inaugural ceremonies throughout our Nation’s history and at every level of government. Plaintiffs have not presented a single legal precedent holding unconstitutional such historical customs and practices." It also cites legal authority from 26 states incorporating the phrase "so help me God" (or a similar phrase) into oaths of office for state officials.
The Texas AG office’s press release states: "The constitutionality of public acknowledgements of God by governmental institutions has been repeatedly affirmed by the United States Supreme Court. In Marsh v. Chambers , the high court upheld the constitutionality of opening every legislative session with a clergy-led prayer. As Justice Sandra Day O’Connor has noted, such religious observances are used for ‘solemnizing public occasions, expressing confidence in the future, and encouraging the recognition of what is worthy of appreciation in society.’"
The federal district court for the District of Columbia has scheduled a hearing next week. Stay tuned . . .
#1 Ophelia Benson on Saturday January 10, 2009 at 9:06am
‘As Justice Sandra Day O’Connor has noted, such religious observances are used for ‘solemnizing public occasions, expressing confidence in the future, and encouraging the recognition of what is worthy of appreciation in society.‘”’
Well maybe so, but it doesn’t follow that such religious observances are the best way to do those things, or that there are no alternative ways to do such things, or that there is nothing objectionable about that way of doing things. So there, Texas AG.
#2 Jeff P on Saturday January 10, 2009 at 4:42pm
I wonder if, as the fundamentalists of the country unite in ways that facilitate more and more of these “celebrations,” we can come around to the god-significance of the Europeans and that these occasions will just become “lip service,” devoid of any meaning, substance, and relevance.
It may be an unintended consequence of making god-speak a common part of all of our days, but the more god is tied to money, football games, war, politics and political parties, bumper stickers and license plates, billboards, the stock market, holiday spending-sprees, and action figure toys, the less relevant a public-square god becomes.
#3 albert rogers (Guest) on Thursday January 15, 2009 at 11:35am
Don’t these “Christians” know that it is written (in the Gospel of Matthew) that Jesus of Nazareth condemned practices like “Prayers and oaths invoking God .. incorporated into public .. ceremonies” as worthy only of hypocrites and the heathen?