ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Wednesday, January 31, 1996 TAG: 9601310059
SECTION: VIRGINIA PAGE: A-1 EDITION: METRO
DATELINE: RICHMOND
SOURCE: Associated Press
The bill, which critics said could lead to a violation of students' free-speech rights, advanced easily on a voice vote. It would require the state Board of Education and the attorney general's office to develop guidelines on reciting the pledge in public schools.
Del. David Brickley, D-Prince William County, introduced the measure after complaints that some students are unruly and disrespectful while the pledge is recited. Del. Frank Ruff, R-Mecklenburg County, introduced an identical bill.
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that schools cannot require students to recite the pledge. Jehovah's Witnesses, for example, refuse to take part in the pledge on religious grounds.
``That's protected,'' Brickley said. ``It's another thing to be falling asleep or doodling while the Pledge of Allegiance is being recited. With all the problems we have in this country, this bill won't do any harm.''
But the American Civil Liberties Union disagreed, saying the bill is unnecessary and could produce guidelines that infringe on constitutional rights.
The measure is sailing through the legislature because legislators don't want to be viewed as opposing the pledge, said Kent Willis, executive director of the ACLU of Virginia. But they also are passing the buck by making the Board of Education come up with guidelines, he said.
``How do you vote against the Pledge of Allegiance?'' he said. ``What they get to do is ... put their stamp of approval on a bill that sounds very all-American, yet they're taking no responsibility for what the final terms of the guidelines actually look like.''
The ACLU does not object to the pledge or schools' promotion of it, but schools cannot order students to say it or show respect for it, Willis said. They also cannot punish students who refuse to say it, he said.
Unless the guidelines are carefully tailored to focus on conduct that is clearly disruptive, they could raise constitutional questions, said A.E. Dick Howard, a constitutional law expert at the University of Virginia.
``Those who propose the bill ... should proceed with great care,'' said A.E. Dick Howard, a constitutional law expert at the University of Virginia.
The House is expected to take up the bill for a final vote today. If approved, it will go to the Senate for approval.
LENGTH: Medium: 54 lines KEYWORDS: GENERAL ASSEMBLY 1996by CNB