One of the first major groups to call for the addition of “under God” to the pledge was the Knights of Columbus, a Catholic fraternal organization. In 1952, it began petitioning the federal government to add the phrase to the Pledge of Allegiance. U.S. Representative Louis C. Rabaut, a Democrat from Michigan, was persuaded by the petition, and introduced legislation to add the phrase to the pledge.
Rabaut argued that adding the phrase would give students “a deeper understanding of the real meaning of patriotism,” while adding that it could also provide “a bulwark against communism.” In February 1954, Eisenhower attended a sermon by Reverend George Docherty at the New York Avenue Presbyterian Church in Washington, D.C. that greatly influenced his ideas on the subject.
“To omit the words ‘under God’ in the Pledge of Allegiance is to omit the definitive factor in the American way of life,” Docherty preached. He discounted the right of atheists to object, arguing that an “atheistic American is a contradiction in terms,” because if “you deny the Christian ethic, you fall short of the American ideal of life.”
With Eisenhower on board, the campaign to adopt the phrase had more momentum. On June 14, Flag Day, Eisenhower signed a law adding “under God” to the Pledge of Allegiance. Two years later, Eisenhower also made “In God We Trust” the United States’ official motto (it did not appear on paper currency or stamps before the 1950s).
Legal Challenges to 'Under God'
The addition of “under God” to the pledge led to new lawsuits about whether it violated the rights of students and teachers. In the 1950s and ‘60s, the prominent atheist Joseph L. Lewis filed lawsuits against the state of New York over the pledge. Over the next several decades, similar cases were filed in different states, with the most prominent cases reaching federal courts and even the U.S. Supreme Court in the 21st century.
In 2004, the Supreme Court sided against Michael Newdow, who objected to his daughter having to say the pledge in Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow, on the grounds that he didn’t have sufficient custody over his daughter to make the complaint. In 2010, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against Newdow in a separate but related lawsuit, arguing that the pledge didn’t violate students’ rights because they can choose not to participate.