<P> In September 2013, a case was brought before the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, arguing that the pledge violates the Equal Rights Amendment of the Constitution of Massachusetts . In May 2014, Massachusetts' highest court ruled that the pledge does not discriminate against atheists, saying that the words "under God" represent a patriotic, not a religious, exercise . </P> <P> In February 2015 New Jersey Superior Court Judge David F. Bauman dismissed a lawsuit, ruling that "...the Pledge of Allegiance does not violate the rights of those who don't believe in God and does not have to be removed from the patriotic message ." The case against the Matawan - Aberdeen Regional School District had been brought by a student of the district and the American Humanist Association that argued that the phrase "under God" in the pledge created a climate of discrimination because it promoted religion, making non-believers "second - class citizens ." In a twenty - one page decision, Bauman wrote, "Under (the association members') reasoning, the very constitution under which (the members) seek redress for perceived atheistic marginalization could itself be deemed unconstitutional, an absurd proposition which (association members) do not and cannot advance here ." Bauman said the student could skip the pledge, but upheld a New Jersey law that says pupils must recite the pledge unless they have "conscientious scruples" that do not allow it . He noted, "As a matter of historical tradition, the words' under God' can no more be expunged from the national consciousness than the words' In God We Trust' from every coin in the land, than the words' so help me God' from every presidential oath since 1789, or than the prayer that has opened every congressional session of legislative business since 1787 ." </P>

What does one nation under god indivisible mean