Recommend a book to you, close look USA Linda, American judicial system is one of the reasons why a country strong, also embodies the spirit of the USA. It is good to students studying.

Why do I say that Newdow case and Lillian case is opposite?

 

 

 

Newdow case, Newdow doctors removed from school oath "under God" this sentence, so as to guarantee each

 

A student to believe or not to believe in God's free;

 

Lillian case, Lillian and my brother was forced not in school in the salute to the flag, so as to protect their own belief

 

"The witnesses of Ye Hehua "religious doctrines of freedom.

 

In the two case, the parties are opposed in the school was forced to pay tribute to a sacred thing, according to the requirements of

 

The constitutional guarantee of their freedom of religion, it is completely consistent.

 

The opposite is America legal and social different handling of the case:

 

In 1935, Lillian case, American people support the Lillian, and eventually led to the Federal Supreme Court

 

Li Lian won, so as to ensure the American people's freedom of religious belief;

 

While in Newdow case in 2002, USA administration and congressional effort against Newdow doctor's point of view, and so can

 

Can lose Newdow, thus to America people's freedom of religious belief of restriction and deprivation.

 

Why, in two cases the mainstream view USA society has changed so much? Is it right? Because

 

With the development of the times and especially the development of anti-terrorism situation, America society is more back to the Puritan arms

 

Hold, for those who do not believe in God more fear?

 

Or USA on freedom of religion and its essence is to the Christian faith (generalized) security, when Lillian

 

Because God does not respect the national flag, America social support; and when the new way that you want to delete the God

 

Name, American society clearly expressed resistance.

 

This after an explanation is likely, which can better verification of Puritanism on USA social giant

 

Great influence.

 

  

 

 

Hair post personTheme: Loyalty oath: nationwide constitutional crisis (about Newdow case references)The second floor

 

User name:One hour a day

Registration date:2004-09-28

 Published in2006-10-1700:11:15[reply][Edit][delete][see ip][add black list] 

Loyalty oath: nationwide constitutional crisis

 

Author: ShaoConstructionPosted: the original siteClick the number: 176

 

 

 

 

 

A,

 

Time: June 26, 2002 in the Gregorian calendar, Wednesday.

 

Location: West Coast of San Francisco American.

 

Character: a doctor America California and three judges America Ninth Circuit Court of appeals.

 

Something about American: public schools require students to recite daily face the flag "loyalty oath" litigation.

 

Results: the court of appeals judge the "loyalty oath" unconstitutional.

 

Response: a nationwide constitutional crisis.

 

......

 

This caused a great disturbance ruling stems from a man named Newdow doctor in California. The doctor's daughter in California a San Francisco public school primary school. Many states USA public schools for decades habitually ask students read daily face the flag loyalty oath. The doctor said that his daughter every day by the mental torture in the oath, because the oath in the America called "God's country" (OneNationUnderGod), and his daughter is an atheist. So he decided to sue, Sue public schools to preach religion, thus violating the first amendment to the constitution of American.

 

Of course, there are also reports that. Newdow as a student parents, his daughter every day to recite the oath very unhappy, because he did not want his daughter to believe in god. In his own words: I was an atheist, loyalty oath. I hate, I have the right to stop the teacher to the concept of my daughter and the gods, so she can grow up in an atheistic environment. At the same time, I was on the court, but also to his daughter on his way home from school, no longer said to me because of no back allegiance oath was a cold shoulder.

 

The doctor's lawsuit Newdow actually "win", the three judges American Ninth Circuit Court of appeals to two votes in the vote against ruling: public school flag loyalty oath in violation of the first amendment to the constitution USA about separation of church and state.

 

Two, about "the first amendment"

 

If we pay attention to the above procedure both the prosecution was sentenced to party mentioned America First Amendment to the constitution, then, what is the content of the amendment, can not but arouse our attention.

 

Congress shall make no law about the following matters: establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise of deprivation of liberty; freedom of speech or of the press; the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of rights.

 

The above content is the full text of the first amendment, it involves three aspects: religious (free), speech (free) and assembly (right). Both because of this event has nothing to do with this matter. While religion (free) is put in the first place, it is because USA was originally composed by Puritan immigrants mainly, which so far is in fact a theistic countries. Not only that, South America and those from Spain, Portugal "gold rush" immigration is different, these "of the different teaching" believers by the religious persecution in Europe, they are for refuge, and to persist in its own way to worship, only to overcome difficulties, they came to North America, when gally. So, when they have a state of their own and agreed the constitution, religion and religious freedom is naturally to be put in the first place -- not only in the ten amendment was ranked the first, but also be the first to bear the brunt in the first bar.

 

As for the amendment of the constitution, it is a part of American constitution. USA constitution One divides into two., composed of two plates. One might as well be called "the bill of rights", another is "bill of rights" amendment to the constitution. The difference between the two is that the former is the bill, the national authority and segmentation, for example, legislative, administrative and judicial rights were awarded and discrete coordinate these three kinds of power. The latter is the protection of civil rights. Is the logical relationship between the two, the state power from civil rights (that is to say, it is every citizen ceded their rights into the state power), therefore, the power for the purpose of rights service. But, with the expansion of the power itself, it might in turn cause of maternal rights violation. Therefore, when America framers, at least part of the people think: in the granting of the national power at the same time, it must be restricted, not to let the country this huge "Leviathan" civil rights. So, in the completion of the constitution of the "bill of rights", in fourth years in 1791, and published as "bill of rights" (the first amendment to the constitution ratified when ten). Succinct expression about the two bill may be: the former is the division of power, the latter is the power of prevention.

 

The first amendment may seem simple, but the content is very rich. Only in terms of religion, the separation of politics and religion spirit embodied in national legislation to a particular religion as the state religion, also not to legislate to prohibit any one religion. USA is a theist countries, but religion is not the country thing, but private and personal. This is the "New Testament" in "from the lips of Jesus Caesar what Caesar, God God", two wells river be quite distinct from each other, do not make (in contrast, even an atheist state, if the state is not divided, but could be full of religious atmosphere).

 

Of course, the first amendment is mainly aimed at the Congress and formulated, determine the Congress shall make no law in some aspects. This was so, because members of Congress by popular suffrage and, once elected because of their religious tendency, because they are the most likely, in Congress at this time, if they use the hands of the legislative power to establish their own doctrines as the state religion, things get out of hand. So, as a precaution, the first amendment is natural to turn to lock in the congress.

 

But, from the comprehensive perspective, it has oversight, because, the interference of religious freedom, not only from the Congress, also may come from the administration, from the civil government. But as the precursors of the first amendment, which is put forward by Thomas Jefferson in 1786 and approved by the state of Virginia "the Virginia Statute for religious freedom" has effectively solved the problem. The following is the author quotes from the act of a paragraph of text, it is also to a comment, the first amendment secular spirit, may also wish to now is still the theocratic nature of the state to provide reference to a comparative:

 

People's views are not the object of civil government guidance, nor under its jurisdiction. If we allow officials to power stretching to the thoughts and opinions, as they assume that certain religious teachings and bad tendencies and limit the people into and spread them, that would be a very dangerous error approach, this'll ruin everything for religious freedom.

 

Three, "loyalty oath" unconstitutional

 

According to the first amendment secular spirit, America includes federal and state levels and various public institutions are not in any form to promote, sponsor religious activities. But the public schools ask students to read the "loyalty oath", and because of this oath contained "under God" or "one nation under God," this is obviously a religious word, in fact, make the pledge itself into a kind of religious activities in the form of. More and America public schools are funded by the government to maintain, and the government's money comes from taxpayers, which actually is the use of taxpayer money to fund religious activities. It gives people the feeling is not only the government support in religion, and the government also agreed a soul.

 

This God, according to the America pilgrim, apparently means "a Jewish - Christian". So, today's USA, immigration components are very complex, it has both from Southeast Asia Buddhist, but also from the East Asia, West Asia and North Africa, Islam, when the children were also asked to swear by this language, it is useful to a religious statutes impose another religious laws too? Moreover, the above does not include from atheism countries such as China atheist (of course also refers to America local and from all over the world atheist), whether or not they will think it is an imposing? Because, the former (such as an Islamist) in the oath after all also can imagine Abstract God in their minds to Allah, to refrain from outspoken attack on it, and the atheist, there is no bodhi tree, the heart of God, but, in the mouth is mumbling some words, even if they can not read, at least also forced to listen to others, and not a day every day, but can not be said: This is a long term mental distress? This Is it right? Violated the Constitution guarantees freedom of religion? Because in logic, religious freedom implies not religious and anti religious freedom.

 

Four, decision angered America

 

　However, the decision came out, immediately angered USA, and caused a political storm in the United States, of course, is mainly the opposition.

 

　According to "China times" reported: "American President Bush (what) has also been involved in this debate. He and Putin of Canada Russian President (Beijing) held a press conference also has condemned the court the verdict. He said: I think, God is obviously a very important part in my personal life, I is very important in people's daily life is a part of. This is still the ruling and America historical and traditional reasons for the separation of."

 

USA Senate response becomes more intense, when ruling the news, members of national defense act immediately stopped the debate, a few minutes with ninety-nine votes to nil by resolution, denounced the ruling of the court of appeal. Wednesday night, also more than 100 representatives (mostly Republicans) gathered at the Capitol Hill, facing the national flag collective to recite the oath, in protest.

 

As for the USA since folk, the incident, there are countless telephone, e-mail to the media and the ninth federal appeals court. Many America media workers are very shocked, a producer Columbia Evening News said: after hearing instinct everyone is shouting "what?"

 

At the same time, American civil libertarians and conservatives on this ruling also behoove launched a fierce debate. And win the lawsuit Newdow said: the "patriotic" litigation on behalf of his daughter, but he is threatened, some threatening phone calls from the phone constantly, from those who worship God.

 

Because of this, USA Ninth Circuit Court of appeals that announced the suspension of execution in second days the decision of the court, waiting for reconsideration. But according to speculation that, even if the reconsideration unchanged, the judicial department would have to appeal to the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court, the ruling Nive out of ten will be overthrown.

 

Although the Ninth Circuit Court of appeals the ruling America was almost universal opposition, its future -- the Federal Supreme Court decision -- and yet be fraught with grim possibilities, but from a legal point of view, can not really see it what is wrong. Can say even, this is a job with "epoch-making" nature of the politically correct behavior. Say it is "epoch-making", because if the oath unconstitutional thought pushing, USA from the early years of the Republic to today, more than 200 years, a lot of be accustomed to things -- these things have not only become the American experience, customs, history, traditions, and even become a body their unconscious and collective unconscious -- by no measure of the first amendment of the constitution, which is unconstitutional. This is also the case to the most fundamental reason America: even if it can't change the past USA, the so-called law does not blame, but it can profoundly influence American today and tomorrow.

 

Five, USA worries

 

The Ninth Circuit Court of appeals judge loyalty oath unconstitutional, because the oath itself contains a religious word. So, if the religious words out from it, is not done yet. Was introduced in 1892, the original is not religious oath word, until 1954, by the initiative of a Catholic mission, President Eisenhower urged, Congress passed a bill, which add the phrase "God in the countries under", to show that he is a theistic state (now, the act is "illegal law"). But, "under God" Tim maybe not up, now want to dig up, but very not easy.

 

Why? Because not only to dig out and these two words, it is also more out of American's become American religious tradition. America is a Puritan immigration country, development of more than two hundred years, make all aspects of public life in this country are marked by Christian mark. Although the constitution principle of separation of church and state. It may not be the government advocate or legislative state religion, but from the folk spontaneous recognized and accepted point of view, will as the state religion, but without a doubt. This is a traditional and powerful, but the traditional significance lies in, it is also a kind of legitimacy, the legitimacy of the natural habit. It is in this "legal" inertia, oath of "God" words "science" course neglected. But it cannot afford the constitution picky, as long as there are people who carry it out, you'll have to face the.

 

However, now that Americans are difficult problem is, this case has been far from it. For example, American currency, regardless of the currency, or the notes, coins, all with the words such as "we trust god". Mint is the government behavior, to do so, unconstitutional? America when the new president took office, always hand "Bible" oath, whether it is unconstitutional? If the case to the Supreme Court, according to the Convention, in the trial before the Supreme Court, have to say in the Affidavit: "God bless America and the court", this and how to punish? Broadly speaking, America court testimony before the oath, the oath, the congress at the start of each working day before the collective prayer, the president spoke at the end of the habits and USA Anthem Lyrics, both because it contains "God", Is it right? All unconstitutional?

 

If the court of appeals review unchanged, if the Supreme Court upheld the original verdict, here will build the "Domino effect", because according to this case, cited above is unconstitutional. The new road doctor seemed certain exemplary loyalty oath and triggered by the chain reaction, only to be eager for a fight, the next step is prepared to charge $unconstitutional? But, once these are unconstitutional, then, America or not today American? This is caused by the America worries.

 

Six, American as America

 

American as USA, religious work difficult to erase. Can say, is America religion created America historical, cultural and political. Of course, that is not to say it directly religious shape political interference in politics, but refers to it as an ultimate value and the source of strength for the political (one) the impact of influence character by environment. For example, the presidential oath, and vowed to enforce justice on behalf of Heaven but not God, ask God to help him, bless him, to give him strength. This is a kind of faith. Furthermore, American separation of church and state, the original, but also to prevent a sectarian control to use political, political interference freedom of religion. In the end, this principle is to protect the religious freedom of belief in the premise of. Therefore, at that time is uniform of the Puritans, beyond the specific sectarian religions and religious spirit if not dominate politics but in politics, is natural, is also acceptable. In fact this into the formation of the traditional, the formation of the corresponding order. And America is a particularly cherish tradition and pay attention to order in the country, now, the traditional order face the charges, if it really is the end, then, for Americans, or, for now still mostly the Americans, Is it right? Haywire, "The nation is in peril."?

 

However, USA is a duality of state. It is not only a religious traditional theism state, it is also a high degree of freedom and constitutional country height. The constitutional essentials that guarantee freedom of religion, freedom of citizens. Therefore, America as America, is freedom idea in which it was held. "American reading" a Book of "American concept" such statements USA:

 

Other countries are formed in such people, they were born in their family since ancient times to thrive where. Regardless of how the government change, British English, French is the French, Chinese is Chinese; their nation can be split, reconstruction without compromising their country. And America is generated by a concept of country; not the place, but the idea to create a USA government.

 

Yes, in a comparative sense, all factors of the countries in the world have formed in the geopolitical or race, only USA is an exception, which just because an idea: the idea of freedom, is the concept of the original settlers free to North America, and created USA and civilization. Therefore, in the eyes of the world, USA image is definitely not on the cross of Christ Jesus, but on the island of Manhattan, the statue of liberty.

 

If at that time make amendment, due to migration component part, religious freedom only reflect the different sects in a series of Christ, it does not include the pagan outside this and non believers, so, today have things easy, the first amendment to the connotation of religious freedom and even different cases the non religious freedom, more realistic. America because of its Immigrant Heritage and traditional, that some people said, after many years, American white will likely become a minority. In a different race at the state, when the country's superstructure is no longer like today just under the control of the white hands, then, if, the Supreme Court justices are non white and non Christian origin, why he will pray "God bless" the oath of Allegiance? What is more, the president in case of a confirmed atheist, he can hand "Bible" in the inaugural oath? If these are traditional, so, the tradition is a violation of their personal freedom of religion?

 

As a theistic state, conflict, oath on the traditional American and constitutional American now, a federal appeals court made its ruling on the conflict, should say is in line with the principles of political right. The so-called political correctness, namely the right to handle all matters in the field of social public. Politicians, business, treatment, disposal. Disposal standards such as constitutional amendments to its final value, is the "correct. Therefore, in this sense, the traditional is important, it can ensure the continuation of social life and natural; but the constitutionalism is more important, it is the country as the basic maintenance of a community. When the tradition and the individual freedom and security of the liberal constitutional system has been not match, need to change but the former than the latter. Although the change from the traditional point of view, American may not be so USA, but constitutional supremacy, will undoubtedly make America more American, after all, as mentioned above, American first with its freedom and the constitutional government known to the world.

 

 

  

 

 

Hair post personTheme: A mistake in my: Lillian case is lost, three years later, another similar case to correct decisionThe third floor

 

User name:One hour a day

Registration date:2004-09-28

 Published in2006-10-1700:23:20[reply][Edit][delete][see ip][add black list] 

In America, no matter in the past, or now, public schools attach great importance to education in patriotism. This kind of education, in various forms, rich in content, both America history and government this kind of formal learning, also singing patriotic songs, the salute to the flag that influence character by environment form. Through this kind of patriotic education, cultivate students' loyalty to the country. If we take into account the USA is world five continents, four oceans of immigrants, the education is particularly important. Another batch of immigrants' children, began to become Americans"America" process.

 

In a sense, is a patriotic motive, promote the USA worldwide, the earliest established the public free compulsory education. Beginning in the mid nineteenth Century, in the face of a growing number of people from all over Europe, ethnicity, religion is becoming more and more complex language of different immigrant binge, USA gradually established a free public school systems, and actively help immigrants' children quickly become americans.

 

Obviously, patriotism has become an inseparable part American public education. However, in the Second World War in 1940, an ordinary America family, has publicly challenge the patriotism education is an important form of legitimacy, to salute the flag.

 

A violation of state law, regulationsChildren leave home

 

The story happened in 1936. Like all America public schools, East Pennsylvania area of Minor Sverre (Minersville) primary school students to salute the flag every day, and read the "pledge of allegiance" (ThePledgeOfAllegiance): "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and other symbols of the Republic of China, the state one, with liberty and justice for all. "This is an important content of strengthening the students feelings of patriotism American school. But did not think of, one day, 10 year old William and 12 year old Lillian suddenly decided not to salute the flag. Originally, their parents are witnesses (Ye Hehua theJehovah'sWitnesses) believers. The Jehovah's witnesses is the nineteenth Century 70's created only in small denominations, Pennsylvania is the birthplace of it. Originally called the watch, in 1931 was renamed the Jehovah's witnesses.

 

Ye Hehua witness doctrines, something very special. According to the "Old Testament exodus" content, they believe that the Lord is the true God, against the mainstream Christian Holy Father, the son and the Holy Spirit three-in-one doctrine. They hate the worship of idols, idol refused to salute any God other than. Influenced by his parents and church pastor, William and Lillian small age, knew the salute to the flag in violation of their doctrine. The teacher repeated to instill patriotic importance thought, meticulous persuasion, but still be of no avail. The school is not willing to because two children, broke school rules, moreover, the salute to the flag was a Pennsylvania State law, schools must implement the. The school had to drop out of school.

 

William and her father, Gobitis (Gobitis) to find the school, said to salute the flag is patriotism and good citizenship quality of performance, however, this with their religious beliefs among. They love America, but also the worship of God, and that the patriotic citizens must also respect the people of god. They do not require schools to cancel the salute to the flag, but do not want to force their children to engage in conduct against their religion behavior. The school is that, not only to the flag salute state law and regulations, not accommodation. Moreover, the patriotic education of young children is beneficial and harmless, there should be no exception. Since the Ge Beatty, unwilling to let the children to obey, the result can only be removed.

 

Two children cannot attend public school, Ge Beattie, and didn't have the money to send them to a private school. He is be nonplussed over sth. on the occasion, the church members told him, you can turn to USA alliance public free (TheAmericanCivilLibertiesUnion), please they help for children's religious belief and the right to education.

 

Two, the lower court for justiceThe court stressed that the patriotic

 

In America alliance public free help, Gobitis to the Philadelphia Federal District Court against his family, School of Minos violations of religious freedom. The court sentenced him to win, "said a salute to the flag can not be used as the right to the school children to school". The school may, to appeal to the federal court of Appeals for the third circuit, results, still upheld the. The school or not, 1940 to appeal to the Supreme Court, at this time, the school became the Minos, but Ge Beatty, as the defendant.

 

Prior to this, there are also three refused to salute the flag. The above to the Supreme Court, but in a state of jurisdiction and was beaten back. But before the case is the case, and the case is the case. More importantly, the second world war has been like a raging fire in Eurasia, America faces in the threat of war, so the domestic patriotism rise. In this context, the Supreme Court accepted the case in an.

 

In order to ensure the case, USA alliance public freedom not only hired ha depressed university law professor Beattie, major suit for GE, as his lawyer, but also a large number of domestic legal authority mobilization signatures of support. In addition, America Lawyers Association "bill of rights" Commission and court of friends of the identity, Ge Beatty, a defended. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court in June 3, 1940 8 to 1 votes, losing to ge Beatty gap. But Hugo Black (HugoBlack, 19371971 years) three liberal judges agreed very reluctantly, the chief justice Hughes selected judge Felix Frankfurter (FlexFrankfurter, 19391962 years) to the drafting and read the majority opinion. By Frank Ford to make this a thankless task of the job, it is a great irony. Because he is one of the founders America alliance public free, then (1920) he was at the Harvard University law professor. But Hughes commissioned him to draft opinions, but also in the reason, is not accidental. Because he was born in Austria of Jewish immigrants, and later naturalized as a citizen American. He authored, to which is, to strengthen the ruling patriotic.

 

Frank Ford opening stress, an important responsibility of the court is must seek the coordination in the conflict between freedom and authority. ". However, when the freedom is the freedom of religion, and the authority is to defend the country public authority, judicial conscience (judicialConscience) is facing the most severe test". In his view, in this test, when the personal religious beliefs and political and social interest conflicts, the parties can not shirk its political responsibility.

 

The salute is a can not shirk its political responsibility to the flag. To this end, he discusses the importance of national flag as a symbol of the. "The foundation of a free society is shared emotion". This sentiment is against all people sincerely unity America efforts made, and be handed down from generation to generation of the traditional. "We rely on the symbol of life. Our national flag is the symbol of national unity, it is beyond the differences in our internal within the framework of the constitution, no matter how great the difference". Therefore, "the national flag is the symbol of national strength, is the most significant symbol of freedom".

 

Since the national unity is the basis of national security, the national flag is the symbol of the state, schools may require students to salute the flag and as a mandatory activity, if the boycott the event on religious grounds, it would damage the school this patriotic effect. Therefore, he hoped that, in the "government education authorities and their parental authority in the opposition", parents should be the overall situation, "in the range of damage to their rights, to persuade their children understand the State Education Department advocate the correctness and wisdom of loyalty, this is the side of religious tolerance, the most vivid. "

 

The only expressed different views of justice Harlan Stone(HarlanStone, 19251941 years, 19411946 year Chief Justice), as his name (meaning stone) as his name (meaning stone) implies, calm and firm in his stance, untouched by excessive patriotism. In court, he especially to ge Beatty, one family paid tribute, read their different views: "said the case, is not only to suppress the freedom of speech, press freedom of religious belief, this one theory should be forbidden by the first amendment of the constitution, also a violation of the fourteenth amendment. It is shown by the legal state forcing the students to express a reluctant to express emotions, this force has a violation of their religious beliefs. "In his view, to instil patriotic feelings, there are many other better way, need not force children to admit that they do not believe in something, inducing them to automatic said loyalty is one thing, to force them to do so is another matter". He goes on to say, "the constitution of public free assurance, the human mind and human spirit (theHumanMindAndHumanSpirit) the guarantee of freedom, the freedom of expression and the opportunity of the hearts and minds of the guarantee".

 

The supreme court politics and international situation based on rather than the ruling constitutional basis for making, cause uproar. National newspapers criticised the decision more than support. A newspaper "the most influential USA Midwestern Saint Louis post" (TheStLouisPost-Dispatch) comments very representative: "the decision of the Supreme Court is in violation of American principle, we believe that the Supreme Court has to widespread hysteria surrender. If patriotism on such practices - violate people's most basic religious freedom - to develop it, then, patriotism is not noble, but a by law into our throats ".

 

Three, bad judgmentVictims of the court for justice

 

This is a clear violation of America traditional freedom judgment, have had a bad influence, far beyond the Supreme Court justices thought. On the patriotic banner, Ye Hehua witness an unprovoked attack, many children are forced to drop out of school. Some historians even believe that, in this case the green light on the social activities of persecution and discrimination. According to statistics America alliance free public in 1941, the total of 236 against Jehovah's Witnesses of the event, the public 1000 passengers hurt. It even claimed that "since the Mormons (MORMONS) hit since, has never been a religious organization received such persecution".

 

Social reality is sad, but the academic circles well founded criticism makes the justices. Some of them have to rethink their position. In 1942 another relates to Jehovah's Witnesses case, Black, Douglas (WilliamDouglas,1939-1975 years) and Murphy (FrankMurphy1940-1949 years), three justices expressed different views: "because we support the plaintiff in the Gobitis opinion, we think it is indicated that the suitable time, we now believe that was a mistake. "Douglas later in his memoirs once said, he in the Gobitis opinion too" naive ", like other judges, he succumb to frank Ford wisdom," at that time, he is our hero. He did have a deep knowledge of constitutional law, admire him we think little of ". In addition, then constitute the Supreme Court also had the new change. The conservative judge James Mcrenos (JamesMcReynolds, 1914 - 1941) retired, the position of the last post by Willy Ratlics (WileyRutledges, 19431949 years) fill. The latter is a professor of law, to advocate for the protection of the public free and famous. Stone was promoted to chief justice, to replace retiring Hughes. Stone's position was filled by the Roosevelt administration's justice minister Robert Jackson (RobertJackson, 19411954 years) instead of.

 

At this time there was a similar case to the Supreme court. At that time, the judgment in the Gobitis opinion's encouragement, the West Virginia Council passed a law school, through the relevant courses and extracurricular activities to strengthen the education of patriotism, the children accordingly, bureau of Education asked all the students and teachers in public schools recite the oath of allegiance to the regular and the salute to the flag. If a student refuses to obey, will be expelled. There are 7 from Jehovah's witnesses the families of the children were expelled from school, the school authorities even threatened to take them to the young offenders institute.

 

In the face of arbitrary acts of the school authorities, parents may. One is called WalterBarnett (WalterBarnette) the case to the local federal district court, because his two daughters are being expelled. 3 judges from the court refused to salute the flag, the legal acts, the plaintiff, open to challenge the West Virginia flag and the Gobitis case. One important reason for this decision is, they noticed because the Supreme Court judge position and pose changes, there will be at least 4 justice against the original judgment, it is to overthrow the bad precedent may provide. The local education department is certainly not, then the Federal Supreme Court, which is the Supreme Court seek but fail to get the. So, immediately accepted. The official name is the West Virginia Department of education is Ca Barnett (WestVirginiaStateBoardOfEducationV.Barnette,1942), known as the flag salute of second case.

 

Four, the freedom of speech meaning generalizationThe court has far-reaching influence

 

Although the court debate ended in March 11, 1943, but the Supreme Court has deliberately chose June 14th -- USA flag day -- the day to make a decision, it is more than 6 to 3 of the vote decided to maintain the local courts decision. This decision is the opposite of three years ago, this is American Supreme Court history changes of position, fastest, and most complete one. Frank Ford still stubborn, published a 24 page dissent. In the two flag salute case on the position, so that he completely alienated him in public America allies in freedom which old friends.

 

The new judge Jackson draft and the majority opinion that becomes colorful chapters America constitutional history. And the Gobitis opinion around the principle of freedom of religion, the court that a change of angle, launches the elaboration from the principle of freedom of speech. To do so, not only reaffirmed the freedom of speech is one of the most important public rights, and can avoid the Jehovah's witnesses the Christian faith is sincere.

 

Jackson said, the salute to the flag "is a kind of speech (utterance) form. Symbolic expression (symbolism) is a primitive but effective transmission way of thinking. Use of the national emblem and flag to symbolize a system, idea, institution or individual is a shortcut to the soul communication". In view of this, the court is difficult to recognized a mandatory expression form. "If a compulsion to salute the flag of words, we must illustrate the" bill of rights ", which ensure the man said that he wanted to say right, allowing the public power to force the man said he didn't want to say". This is a clear violation of the principle of freedom of speech.

 

At the same time, Jackson also cleverly put forward a new view: that was always considered that is binding only the first amendment to the constitution of the federal government, also can constrain the state and local government. In the Gobitis opinion, the Supreme Court says it has no right to "become a National Bureau of education", namely the public school flag salute is exclusive jurisdiction State Bureau of education, the court not intervene; but now, it is clear: "now the Fourteenth Amendment has been applied and the state, the protection of the citizens against the state government and all its institutions, bureau of education is no exception".

 

The importance of this decision is the sacred it once again highlighted the public rights. Jackson stressed, "" bill of rights "is the fundamental purpose of change, some basic rights away from political disputes caused by the There's no telling, placed them in a majority of people and officials could not reach, and the legal principles established by the court to deal with them. Individual to life, liberty, property rights, freedom of speech, freedom of belief and the freedom of association rights and other basic rights can not be resorted to vote, they do not depend on any election results. "

 

The government of course can be taken to persuade and set an example to promote national unity, but now the problem is the government want to use force to reach this objective, which will have dangerous consequences: "those forced to eliminate dissent (coerciveEliminationOfDissent) people will soon find, they are actually dissent (exterminatingDissenters). Public opinion forced all will only lead to grave only silence. "

 

Finally, Jackson poetically pointed out: "if there is a change of the stars in our constitution, the star that is, whether in politics, nationalism, religion, or other public opinion on the issue, there is no official, regardless of their position, have no right to decide what is right, can not use words or action to force citizens to express their beliefs (faith). If what the circumstances allow this exception, then, we are never allowed them to happen! "

 

Jackson sonorous and forceful exposition, expressing the Supreme Court on individual rights become classic. Since then, his voice echoing in the Supreme Court over 100 personal rights cases, constitute the USA today's remarks diversified, and even legal cornerstone of extremes. Is praiseworthy for one's excellent conduct, the verdict is in wartime - government usually in order to meet the needs of national security temporarily suppressing dissent - made, which indicates that the Supreme Court, rising in America patriotism period can maintain its independence, the courage to correct their mistakes.

 

Black also used the opportunity to "redeem". In the second (with Douglas), he explained his change of position. Because the salute to the flag of "no law and the first and fourth amendment rights guaranteed by the" students "comprehensive with freedom of religion". He also discussed his understanding of religious freedom clause: "forced expressed words in addition to deceive oneself and others, and can not prove that loyalty. The love of the country must be willing hearts and free mind (willingHeartsAndFreeMind)".