Newdow Lacks Standing in Pledge Case Says E.D. Cal.
The court in Newdow v. Congress of U.S., 383 F.Supp.2d 1229 (E.D. Cal. Sep 14, 2005), has ruled that Michael Newdow, a plaintiff seeking invalidation of the federal statute that incorporates the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance (4 U.S.C. § 4), lacks standing to challenge that statute or a California school district's practice of requiring recitation of the pledge. Newdow's claim of parental standing and standing based on his own attendance of class sessions and board meetings was rejected on the basis of the Supreme Court's decision in Elk Grove School Dist. v. Newdow, 542 U.S. 1 (2004). Newdow's claim of taxpayer standing was considered, but the court ultimately rejected the claim because Newdow failed to establish that the challenged practice caused the school district to expend public funds that would not otherwise be made. Newdow's complaint against the state and district defendants was thus dismissed. Other plaintiffs, however, proceeding under pseudonyms were deemed to have standing.
Newdow v. Congress of U.S., 383 F.Supp.2d 1229 (E.D. Cal. Sep 14, 2005).