Supreme Court copout...

The Supreme Court got around to a big case today, one that affects just about everyone albeit trivially...

...and completely wussed out.

A guy in California named Newdow had sued to have the "under God" reference removed from the pledge and an appeals court upheld his claim. It then went to the SC for final resolution, but instead of sacking up and making the call, the Justices bailed out by using the man's ongoing custody battle with his wife as an excuse to throw the case out. Turns out he's currently fighting for custody of his daughter and as such isn't her full legal guardian. Therefore, according to the highest court in the land, he doesn't have the right to sue on her behalf. With this explanation, they dismissed the case. How's that for no backbone?

It's not that I care either way about schoolkids blindly acknowledging God in unison every morning (I won't say the pledge, it's a little too 1984 for my taste), but I'd like to think that the Supreme Court has the stones to make these far-reaching, sensitive decisions. This sidestep-on-a-technicality stinks of election-year politics. I'd bet my next paycheck that the word came down from the White House to not rock the boat any worse than it's already rocked, especially on a topic that incites such strong feelings in so many people. The uproar that it would have caused would have been disaster for the Bush status-quo. Of course, these are the same Justices that crowned him President in the first place...