Pledge Protection Act of 2004

PLEDGE PROTECTION ACT OF 2004 -- (House of Representatives - September 23, 2004)

(BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT)

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the Democratic whip of the House.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, 2 minutes is obviously not sufficient time to respond to simplistic arguments. The previous speaker said he has heard simple legal arguments. He talked about why people came to America.

I chaired the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, the Helsinki Commission, and I went to numerous countries in which the judiciary was not independent, where it was dictated to by the legislature and the executive departments if the judiciary did not do what the legislature and the executive wanted them to do. That is the perverseness of this legislation. That is the demagoguery of this legislation. This is the simplistic approach that this legislation takes.

Let me say, I believe that "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance is absolutely appropriately there. It is constitutional, and it ought to be there. And frankly, if the Supreme Court ruled it was unconstitutional, I would vote for a constitutional amendment to ensure its presence.

The gentleman is correct; Thomas Jefferson intoned those compelling words that we get our rights not from the legislature, not from the executive, not even from the majority. Those basic rights are within us as children of God. That is the difference between this country. That is what Marbury v. Madison meant. It meant a legislature, irrespective of its animus, irrespective of the prejudice that it wanted to include, not in this instance but in other instances, could be overseen by the courts of this United States.

The gentleman mentioned the Dred Scott decision. It was not the legislature that overturned that decision or the majority of Americans that overturned that decision; it was the Supreme Court of the United States ultimately that said that is wrong. The gentleman is absolutely correct; the Supreme Court said separate is not equal. But had they been precluded from having the jurisdiction over that case, we would still have segregated schools. We would still have separate but equal, but it was the courts that stepped in and made sure that the dream of America was the reality of America.

Defeat this legislation. There is no case pending. It has been dismissed by the Supreme Court.

No court in this Nation has precluded. Every child in America now stands and proudly stands, as we do in this chamber, and pledges allegiance to our flag and to this Nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. But we have found through the centuries that justice, justice, justice is protected by our independent judiciary. Let us keep it that way for all Americans. Defeat this legislation.