WRITTEN TESTIMONY OF WILLIAM E. DANNEMEYER

TO SUBCOMMITTEE ON COURTS, THE INTERNET,

AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

September 13, 2004

3:00 PM

Room 2141 Rayburn House Office Building

 

 

Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr., Chairman

U.S. House Committee on the Judiciary

Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property

2138 Rayburn House Office Building

Washington, D.C.  20515

 

Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee:

 

                Thomas Jefferson is generally recognized by most historians as the principal author of the Declaration of Independence and James Madison as the father of the U.S. Constitution.  Our founding fathers created a federal system of three branches - executive, legislative and judicial.  The system was not designed to be efficient; on the contrary, the checks and balances of these branches of government, as they struggled for power, were designed to provide the best chance of preserving freedom for the people of America.

 

            On Aug. 18, 1821, Jefferson wrote to Charles Hammond and expressed that of the three branches of government, the one he feared the most was the federal judiciary: “The federal judiciary is …working like gravity by night and by day, gaining a little today and a little tomorrow, and advancing its noiseless step like a thief over the field of jurisdiction until all shall be usurped from the states, and the government of all be consolidated into one (i.e., federalization).”

 

            Decisions of the federal judiciary over the last half-century have resulted in the theft of our Judeo-Christian heritage.  Here’s a brief sampling:

 

·        Enacting “a wall of separation between church and state”; Everson vs. Board of Education, 1947.

·        Banning nondenominational prayer from public schools; Engel vs. Vitale, 1962.

·        Removing the Ten Commandments from public school walls; Stone vs. Graham, 1980.

·        Striking down a “period of silence not to exceed one minute…for mediation or voluntary prayer”; Wallace vs. Jaffree, 1985.

·        Censoring creationist viewpoints when evolutionist viewpoints are taught; Edwards vs. Aguillard, 1987.

·        Barring prayers at public school graduations; Lee vs. Weisman, 1992.

 

            On Jan. 12, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia gave a speech at Fredericksburg, Va., in which he did a rare thing for a sitting justice: He publicly criticized decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court and lower federal courts.  The sense of his comments was that the courts have gone overboard in keeping God out of government.  He cited the recent decision of Judge Alfred Goodwin of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals barring students in a public school from using the word “God” in the Pledge of Allegiance.

 

            Polling data shows overwhelmingly support for legislation that would prevent such prohibitions.

 

            For example, in 1985, 69 percent of Americans supported school prayer; by 1991, that number had increased to 78 percent.  Similarly, in 1988, 68 percent of Americans supported a constitutional amendment to reinstate school prayer; by 1994, that number had risen to 73 percent.

 

            Furthermore, the public is strongly unified on the subject of spoken – not silent – prayer.  In 1995, support for spoken prayers by students of all faiths was at 75 percent; by 2001, before the terrorist attacks, it was at 77 percent.

 

            Congress can correct the wrong interpretation of the 1st Amendment by decisions of the federal judiciary in two different ways.

 

            One method is a constitutional amendment which would apply to the federal judiciary and to the supreme courts of the states.  This, of course, requires a two-thirds vote in the House and the Senate and the approval of three-fourths of the states.  It is a very daunting hurdle, to say the least.

 

            The other alternative is a statutory approach.  It would require a majority vote in the House and the Senate and the signature of the president.  It would utilize Article III, Section 2.2 of the U.S. Constitution, which authorizes Congress to except certain subject matter from jurisdiction of the federal courts.  This authority was used by the last Congress, the 107th, 12 different times.

 

            Legislation using this approach has been introduced in Congress.

 

            Sen. Wayne Allard, R-Colo., has introduced Senate Bill 1558 to allow display of Ten Commandments and to retain “God” in the pledge and “In God We Trust” as national motto. It uses the Article III exception.

 

            Rep. Ernest Istook, R-Okla., has introduced House Joint Resolution 46 with 95 co-sponsors for a constitutional amendment to allow voluntary prayer in public schools.

 

            Rep. Robert Aderholt, R-Ala., has introduced House Resolution 3799, the Constitutional Restoration Act of 2004.  A statute, it would allow voluntary prayer in public schools, the display of the Ten Commandments and keep God in the Pledge and in the National Motto.  It utilizes Article 3 Sec. 2.2.

 

 

 

                                                                                                William E. Dannemeyer