I want to bring you the latest chapter in a relentless crusade to purge all religious expression in the federal government.

The latest chapter comes from California atheist Michael Newdow, who you may remember as filing numerous lawsuits over the years - challenging the Pledge of Allegiance and now Presidential inaugural prayers including the phrase in the oath, "So help me God."

The fact is Newdow's suit - filed in January in an attempt to keep the presidential prayers from occuring - was rejected by a federal district court.  Just days before the Presidential inauguration, a federal judge dismissed Newdow’s challenge and refused to block the inaugural prayer saying the plaintiffs (Newdow along with some 30 others) lacked standing because they failed to show harm that would result from the prayers taking place.  We filed an important amicus brief in that case in January arguing that Newdow’s suit "must not be permitted to move forward" noting that references to God at inaugurations date back to the very origins of this country.  The ACLJ amicus brief filed with the federal district court is posted here.

Now, Newdow and the other plaintiffs have appealed that decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.

In our amicus brief filed today, we urge the appeals court to affirm the lower court decision dismissing Newdow’s suit and argues that the legal challenge lacks standing and is without merit.  You can read our amicus brief filed today here.  Our arguments are clear:  "Newdow has filed no less than nine lawsuits, and has wasted untold judicial resources," our brief asserts.  "His targeting of religious expression at Presidential inaugurations is particularly meritless given the controlling decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in Marsh v. Chambers, 463 U.S. 783 (1983)."

Here's the bottom line:  This legal challenge has no merit and is nothing more than a continuation of a flawed attempt to remove all religious references and observances from American public life.  This continuing challenge has wasted untold judicial resources – resources that are clearly needed in cases involving real threats to American liberties.

The federal district court correctly dismissed this suit months ago and we’re confident that the federal appeals court will uphold that decision.  We will keep you posted.