Judge who once ruled Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional
Alfred Goodwin, a federal judge who caused a furor in 2002 when he wrote the majority opinion in a decision that declared the Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional, finding that the phrase “one nation under God” violated the separation of church and state — a ruling that was later reversed by the Supreme Court — died Dec. 27 in Bend, Ore. He was 99.
His son Karl announced the death, in a hospice. Nominated by President Richard Nixon, Judge Goodwin, who spent nearly all his legal career on the bench, was one of the longest-serving federal jurists in U.S. history. He started in 1969 as a district court judge in Oregon, and then served on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which covers nine Western states, for 51 years, until his death.
It was as a member of that court that he joined in a 2-1 decision that struck down the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools. He wrote in his majority opinion that the words “under God” in the pledge were as objectionable as “we are a nation ‘under Jesus,’ a nation ‘under Vishnu,’ a nation ‘under Zeus,’ or a nation ‘under no God’” would be.
The ruling came in a case filed by an atheist, Michael Newdow, against a school district near Sacramento, Calif., where his daughter attended elementary school.
Judge Goodwin wrote that in defending the words “under God” in the pledge, the district was “conveying a message of state endorsement of religious belief.”
The ruling compelled public schools in the court’s jurisdiction to stop requiring teachers to lead students in the pledge.
The political blowback was immediate, coming amid a wave of patriotism in the wake of 9/11.
President George W. Bush called the ruling “out of step with the traditions and history of America.” Tom Daschle, the Senate Democratic leader, said, “This decision is just nuts.” The Senate passed a resolution, by a vote of 99-0, reaffirming the language of the pledge.
Judge Goodwin stayed the ruling while it was under appeal to the full 9th Circuit court. But he was unfazed by the criticism.
“I never had much confidence in the attention span of elected officials for any kind of deep thinking about important issues,” he told the Law. com website. “When they pop off after what I call a bumper strip headline, they almost always give a superficial response.”
Almost a year later, the full court let stand the decision, though over the vehement objections of nine of the circuit’s 24 judges. In the ruling, Judge Goodwin reinforced his earlier opinion, writing that “in the context of the pledge, the statement that the United States is a nation ‘under God’ is a profession of a religious belief, namely a belief in monotheism.”
But in June 2004, the U.S. Supreme Court, by a vote of 5-3, preserved “under God” in the pledge by ruling that Newdow had lacked standing to bring the case. The court did not rule on the constitutional issue.
For a long time, the 9th Circuit had a reputation for being liberal, with its rulings being reversed at a disproportionate rate by the Supreme Court. Judge Goodwin accepted as almost inevitable that his decisions on the 9th Circuit would be overturned if they were taken up by the Supreme Court.
“Out of the nearly 4,000 cases that we disposed of last year, I think the Supreme Court took about 28 of them,” he told the Oregon Historical Society in the mid-1980s. “Well, they didn’t take them to affirm.”
Following four years in private practice, he became a state circuit judge in Lane County, Oregon. He was appointed to the Oregon Supreme Court in 1960 by Gov. Mark Hatfield, a Republican who, later as a U.S. senator, would twice recommend Judge Goodwin to fill vacancies on the Supreme Court.
One of Judge Goodwin’s best- known cases was brought by Vanna White, longtime host and letter turner on the TV game show “Wheel of Fortune.” Samsung Electronics and advertising agency David Deutsch Associates, had, without her permission, depicted Ms. White in a published ad for videocassette recorders. In the ad, a futuristic robot, posing beside a game board that looked like the “Wheel of Fortune” set, wore a wig, a gown and jewelry that resembled Ms. White’s on-air look.
In his opinion, in favor of Ms. White, Judge Goodwin drolly wrote: “Vanna White dresses exactly like this at times, but so do many other women. The robot is in the process of turning a block letter on a game board. Vanna White dresses like this while turning letters on a game board, but perhaps similarly-attired Scrabbleplaying women do this as well.”
Ms. White received a settlement of $412,000.