Con to the question "Should the Words "under God" Be in the US Pledge of Allegiance?"
"Since the emergence of its Establishment Clause jurisprudence nearly fifty years ago, the Supreme Court has struggled mightily to explain why ceremonial deism is permitted in our constitutional framework while other practices the Court has invalidated are not. The normative vision embraced by the endorsement test is blurred beyond recognition if practices such as...a Pledge of Allegiance to a nation 'under God,' and the like are permitted to persist. Any explanation of why these practices survive constitutional scrutiny under this test, while school prayer and other practices invalidated by the Court do not, is hopelessly inadequate."
Experts JD's (lawyers), US Presidents, federal appellate opinions, US Founding Fathers, Members of Congress, members of state legislative bodies with significant involvement in, or related to, the "under God" conflict and/or government and constitutional law, and those with PhD's in government, constitutional law or other relevant fields. [Note: Experts definition varies by site.]
Involvement and Affiliations:
Counsel, Litigation and Intellectual Property Practice, Hunton & Williams LLP
Visiting Assistant Professor and Director of Legal Writing, University of Illinois College of Law, 1994-1996