A federal judge threw out a spurious lawsuit by serial atheist litigant Michael Newdow. Yet in reporting the story in its January 16 print edition, the Washington Post made it sound like a federal judge has ended the suspsense and permitted prayers to be offered at the inauguration, as though they were seriously in danger in the first place.
"Judge Clears the Way for Prayer at Swearing-In," declared the page B4 headline in the Inauguration Watch digest. Staff writer Del Quentin Wilber echoed the headline's language in his lede:
A federal judge yesterday cleared the way for government officials and ministers to pray and make references to God during the swearing-in.
Wilber explained that "U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton refused to grant an injunction in a lawsuit seeking to block such references." Nowhere in his 3-paragraph-long brief did Wilber mention Newdow by name, nor his history of frivolous litigation such as trying to remove "under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance and "In God We Trust" from U.S. currency.
But it seems the trouble might be with Wilber's editors. An online version filed the afternoon of January 15 -- headlined "Judge: Reference to God Okay During Inauguration" -- was longer and mentioned both that Newdow was the ring leader in the legal freak show and that he's tried and failed, twice, before:
The group of atheists, led by Californian Michael A. Newdow, sued Roberts, several officials in charge of inaugural festivities, the Rev. Joseph E. Lowery and megachurch pastor Rick Warren.
They filed the complaint in U.S. District Court. Newdow failed in similar lawsuits to remove prayer from President Bush’s swearing-in ceremonies in 2001 and 2005.
That being said, Wilber's online lede was nearly identical to the print version:
A federal judge moments ago cleared the way for government officials and ministers to pray and make references to God during the swearing-in of President-elect Barack Obama on Tuesday.
—Ken Shepherd is Managing Editor of NewsBusters
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Frivilous
January 16, 2009 - 12:37 ET by allanfSince the Supreme Court, House and Senate begin with a benediction, it would be hard to sustain such a claim.
Of course, WaPo will take a negative slant
January 16, 2009 - 12:43 ET by CKA in Red State USAOf course, the secular humanists, the moral relatvists, the moral agnostics -- and the atheists -- that almost entirely populate the adversary/advocacy media would cast the story such that the courts have permitted this.
Just one more reason that it cannot be too soon for the entire print and broadcast advocacy/adversary media to collapse and go out of business.
Bubble Burst!
January 16, 2009 - 12:46 ET by CobraMan"A federal judge moments ago cleared the way for government officials and ministers to pray and make references to God during the swearing-in of President-elect Barack Obama on Tuesday."
I hate to burst your bubble there, Wilber, but it is the Constitution that "cleared the way" with the First Amendment. The Judge just upheld that Constitution right to freedom of expression, including religious expression.
Obama: My job is above my pay grade
@#$%^!@!*#$%, Wilber. There,
January 16, 2009 - 12:47 ET by SickofLibs@#$%^!@!*#$%, Wilber.
There, I just swore Wilber in.
Guilty as charged. Next?
I hope that buried in the
January 16, 2009 - 13:23 ET by Jack BauerI hope that buried in the judgment are the words: