B.   Magistrate Judge Hollows' ruling on the merits.
President Bush agrees with the Magistrate Judge's finding that the recitation of a prayer per se at the inauguration does not violate the Establishment Clause.  F&R, p. 9.  Based on that finding alone, Newdow's complaint should be dismissed in its entirety.
The Magistrate Judge, however, suggests that the specific prayer that was given may have violated the Establishment Clause because of its references to Jesus Christ, and suggests that "further proceedings" should be held on the issue. F&R, p. 12. President Bush disagrees.  The only case involving prayer cited by the Magistrate Judge is Coles v. Cleveland Board of Education, 171 F.3d 369 (6th Cir. 1999).  However, that case does not suggest that a prayer otherwise permissible under Marsh v. Chambers, 463 U.S. 783, 103 S.Ct. 3330 (1983) may nevertheless violate the Establishment Clause because of its content.
In Coles the appellate court held that opening public school board meetings with a prayer violated the Establishment Clause, citing a long unbroken line of Supreme Court cases 4  banning religious activities in public schools.  Coles, at 383. The school district argued that the prayer was more like the legislative prayer permitted under Marsh.  Id./ at 380.  The
4    E.g, Lee v. Weisman, 505 U.S. 577, 112 S.Ct. 2649 (1992)(banning prayers at public school graduation ceremonies) ;
School Dist. of Ablngton Tp. v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203, 83 S.Ct. 1560 (1963)(holding that statute requiring schools to begin each day with a Bible reading violates the Establishment Clause) ;
Engel v. Vltale, 370 U.S. 421, 82 S.Ct. 1261 (1962)(holding that beginning public school classes each day with a prayer violated the Establishment Clause);