Screaming Penguin - Source Does Matter

Dang, you beat me to it. Talk about sidestepping the issue altogether. They seem to have done quite a bit of that for more controversial cases. Something tells me that logically they agree with the argument but personally/religously they want it in there.

>>. Then let's say that your friendly Christian Coalition sued to have it put back on grounds of a mistrial due to his legal authority lack.

The thing is, though, its the Supreme Court. There isn't an appeals process for a SC ruling to do that.

Don't get me wrong, I understand that they had a legitimate reason for their decision, which, BTW, does establish a pretty important precedent w/re: non-guardian parents rights, but it still smells of a cop out to me.

You are heimann's legal guardian? Wow.

also it seems I dont have to file suit. dont know the details but heard on NPR today that several OTHER similar suits are expected to hit the supreme court this year. and in these they wont have the same option to skip out.

now that said i have absolutely ZERO faith that most of the supreme court understands the constitution and will rule correctly that any mention of monotheism, which is clearly religious, is clearly unconstitutional in ANY publicly funded institution (that I might add should INCLUDE A COURT, so help me god) and has nothing to do with "patriotism" that I Renquist (I think it was he) spouted off about today. When they do finally get the issue and have to make a real decision I would bet they still find some way to leave things as is just to avoid the uproar of idiots and again piss on the constitution.