Pledge cases stripped from courts is good but not enough, says Catholic League

Sep 23, 2004 / 22:00 pm

Catholic League president William Donohue supported the House of Representatives’ decision yesterday to prevent the federal courts from ruling on whether the words “under God” should be deleted from the Pledge of Allegiance, but he said it is not enough.

“Given the reckless disregard that so many judges have shown for the plain language of the Constitution, it is entirely understandable that the House would move to prohibit the federal courts, including the Supreme Court, from hearing cases involving the Pledge,” he said.  “But this is the wrong remedy: much more drastic action is needed.

“Court stripping is too tame a remedy given the undemocratic nature of today’s courts,” he continued. “What is needed is a constitutional amendment that would prohibit the Supreme Court from nullifying congressional legislation unless the opinion were unanimous. The Congress should then be allowed to override a unanimous high court veto by a two-thirds vote in both houses.”

Donohue said a similar position was first presented by Chief Justice John Marshall and then by former-Marxist political philosopher Sidney Hook in the 1960s. 

“That the courts have become even more undemocratic since is indisputable,” Donohue said. He pointed to the Florida Supreme Court decision yesterday on the case of Terri Schiavo as an example.