Terry Everett, March 10, 2003

The battle to preserve the values and moral fiber of our great nation from the liberal assault of judicial activism in America's courts continues to be fought. Nearly two weeks ago, a U.S. appeals court in California stood firm in its controversial decision to declare the Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional. And just last week, liberals in the U.S. Senate succeeded in holding up a vote on Washington, DC federal appeals court nominee Miguel Estrada because he is too "conservative."

Both news stories on the surface may seem unrelated, but they illustrate precisely what is at stake in America if liberals succeed in placing activists on federal court benches. In San Francisco, the liberal U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit voted on February 28 to stick to its decision of last June holding the Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional merely because of the two words "under God." The effect of this ruling would be to ban the recitation of the Pledge in public schools in states under the court's jurisdiction: Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington.

Meanwhile, in Washington, DC, liberal Senators mustered enough votes March 6 to maintain their block on a vote of President Bush's nominee for the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, Miguel Estrada. Estrada, who has a distinguished legal background, is opposed by many liberals who cannot accept that fact that the Hispanic judicial nominee is a conservative and a strict interpreter of the Constitution. The DC federal appeals court is often a stepping stone for U.S. Supreme Court nominations.

The issue of judicial activism is a serious one in our nation. The practice of liberal judges seeking to rewrite law to match their own views of society has been largely unchecked and serves to disrupt the balance of power our Founding Fathers intended. The result is rulings like the one from the Ninth Circuit as judges impose their own narrow political and social agendas rather than honor their duty to uphold the Constitution.

One has to wonder what possible harm there is in retaining the reference to God in the Pledge of Allegiance that is recited daily by millions of America's school children? Liberals who seek to ban God from the Pledge were also behind banning prayer from the classroom and the sad legacy of that decision is played out today in the violence in our nation's schools.

As a member of the U.S. House of Representatives, I am not able to vote on the confirmation of Miguel Estrada - only the U.S. Senate has that power. However, I do have a voice in protecting the integrity of our time-honored Pledge of Allegiance from liberal court assault. Accordingly, I have cosponsored legislation recently introduced here in the House expressing the sense of Congress disapproving the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling.

Meanwhile, the Bush Administration has vowed to keep pushing for a Senate vote on Miguel Estrada's nomination to the DC federal appeals court, and the Administration continues to support efforts to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court the Ninth Circuit Court's decision against the Pledge of Allegiance.

Congressman Terry Everett represents the Seventh Congressional District of Alabama in the United States House of Representatives.