|
Attorney
General Defends Constitutionality of Prayer during Presidential Inauguration
Abbott leads 50 state coalition in defense
of prayer, presidential oath of office
 Austin--Texas Attorney
General Greg Abbott and a bipartisan coalition of Attorneys General representing
all fifty states and the U.S. Virgin Islands recently took legal action to
defend the constitutionality of prayer during President-elect Barack Obama’s
Presidential Inauguration. In an amicus brief that was authored by Attorney
General Abbott and filed with the U.S. District Court for the District of
Columbia, the state Attorneys General also defended the President-elect’s right
to say the words “so help me God” while reciting the presidential oath of
office.
“Since President George Washington uttered the words ‘so help me God’ at his
first inauguration in 1789, American presidents have a longstanding, historic
tradition of invoking the Almighty at their inaugural ceremonies,” said Attorney
General Greg Abbott. “Despite more than two hundred years of established
tradition – and no legal precedent for their challenge – a group of activists
have asked the courts to interfere with President-elect Obama’s right to pray
and invoke God during his inauguration as forty-fourth President of the United
States. Today’s legal action reflects a concerted bipartisan, fifty-state effort
to defend a constitutional acknowledgement of faith during an inaugural
celebration.”
The states filed their amicus brief in an effort to defeat a legal challenge
that activist Michael Newdow and several atheist organizations filed on Dec. 31,
2008. Their lawsuit claims that the longstanding inaugural traditions—prayer and
an oath of office that includes the words ‘so help me God’—violate the First
Amendment’s Establishment Clause.
Public acknowledgements of God at official functions have been customary since
the nation’s founding. President George Washington began an unbroken, 200-year
tradition when he inserted the phrase “so help me God” at the end of his oath of
office in 1789. Today it is common for prayers and oaths invoking God to be
incorporated into swearing-in ceremonies across the country. For example,
Article XVI, Section 1 of the Texas Constitution provides that all appointed and
elected officers shall take an oath of office – and that constitutional oath
includes the phrase “so help me God.”
At the federal level, members of the United States Congress are also sworn-in
using an oath that invokes the Almighty. When the 111th Congress convened
Tuesday, the House and Senate Chaplains delivered a prayer just before Senators
and Representatives recited an oath of office that incorporated the phrase “so
help me God.”
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.”
Explaining the states’ legal position, Texas Solicitor General James Ho said:
“From daily prayers during legislative sessions to monuments on public property
displaying the Ten Commandments, the United States Supreme Court has repeatedly
upheld the constitutionality of official acknowledgments of faith. Despite those
high court precedents, the plaintiffs’ lawsuit challenges the President-elect’s
inaugural ceremonies--and in effect attacks 25 state constitutional oaths of
office. The plaintiffs are unable to cite a single legal precedent to support
their challenge, so we are confident it will meet the same fate as their
previous, legally baseless lawsuits.”
The states’ brief in Michael Newdow, et al. v. Hon. John Roberts, Jr. reflects
Attorney General Abbott’s latest effort to lead a multi-state defense of public
acknowledgments of God. In a 2003 amicus brief that was filed with the U.S.
Supreme Court on behalf of all 50 states, Attorney General Abbott successfully
helped thwart Newdow’s attempt to remove the words “under God” from the U.S.
Pledge of Allegiance. In 2007, he defeated a separate lawsuit attempting to
remove the words “under God” from the Texas Pledge of Allegiance.
Attorney General Abbott also personally appeared before the U.S. Supreme Court,
where he successfully defended a Ten Commandments monument on the Texas Capitol
grounds. In that case, Van Orden v. Perry, the plaintiff sought to remove a Ten
Commandments from the Texas Capitol, but the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the
monument was constitutional.
| 
