Newdow v. Eagan
In view of the Supreme Court’s pronouncement that “the religious liberty protected by the Constitution is abridged when the State affirmatively sponsors the particular religious practice of prayer” – in addition to James Madison’s unequivocal statement that the establishment of the chaplainship in Congress is “a palpable violation of equal rights, as well as of Constitutional principles” – Newdow filed a challenge to the use of taxpayer-funded congressional chaplains in August, 2002.
The District Court for the District of Columbia deemed him to lack standing.
Newdow is now looking for a “proper” plaintiff, so that an end can be put to this clearly unconstitutional practice.
Case Updates
- Congressional Chaplain Case Updates May 16, 2003
Note: Some of the following documents are just the raw, unformatted, output from our OCR software and others are not even scanned at this time. We apologize if this is an inconvenience.
U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
08-27-2002 Rev. Dr. Michael Newdow (Plaintiff) files Original Complaint against Congress and its officers, responsible for paying the salaries of the congressional chaplains. The complaint alleges that congressional chaplains violate the Establishment Clause. 11-21-2002 The Congressional Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (needs work #2) filed. 11-22-2002 The United States’ Motion to Dismiss (needs work #3) filed. 12-13-2002 Plaintiff’s Opposition to Motions to Dismiss (needs work #4) filed. 01-16-2003 Reply Memorandum of Senate Defendants filed. 01-16-2003 Reply Memorandum of United States filed. 03-24-2004 District Court Judge Kennedy issues Grant of Motions to Dismiss. 05-12-2003 Plaintiff files Amended Complaint (needs work #5). 05-16-2003 The United States’ Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint filed.