noteworthy wrote:
] Michael Newdow, on the dismissal of his case, in today's NYT.
]
] The case, which I brought, presented the court with an
] important question.
]
] The court ruled that since I do not have legal custody of my
] daughter, I do not have the right to pursue the matter in the
] federal courts.
]
] What's to limit this policy in the future?
]
] After tens of thousands of hours invested over six
] years, the Supreme Court simply dismissed the case.
]
] God bless America.

You know what? Damn right Bless America (I don't want you to get the sense that I care in any way about whether or not "one nation under god" stands). We have a set of rules for how you get appellate review. The rule of law stands. This entire episode stands on the shoulders of Newdow's lawyer. It is well known the supreme court will want to dismiss, and are in fact bound to dismiss, on any technicality rather than the merits of the case. Their jurisdiction is limited BY LAW (congress has the power to limit their jurisdiction).

This was the right outcome for now. Bring another case with all your i's dotted and your t's crossed. Justice may be slow, but it is better to be correct.

And btw: I thought this was pretty much a waste of time anyway. Lobby your school boards. Attack whether or not its recitation is mandatory (I believe it cannot, by law).