Different constitutional challenge to Pledge’s “Under God”—same result?

A Humanist family in N.J. has filed a lawsuit to prevent its child's school from reciting the Pledge of Allegiance every morning. You've heard this story before: folks having been challenging the constitutionality of the Pledge for decades—“>According to the lawyer for the American Humanist Association, which is representing the family:

“The lawsuit is an equal protection suit seeking to declare unconstitutional the New Jersey state law requiring daily recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag in public schools,” David Niose, legal director of the American Humanist Association, told WCBS 880. “Children are taught that patriotism is defined a certain way. They’re taught to associate belief in God with patriot feelings. Certainly, with that being taught, the atheists look like an outsider. The atheist is stigmatized.”

Well, that's interesting. The plaintiff is pursuing its claim on the basis of the New Jersey Constitution, not the U.S. Constitution, which has traditionally been the basis for Pledge challenges. Turns out a similar lawsuit, challenging the Pledge as a violation of the Massachussetts Constitution, is “>Contrary to this RNS article claim that “previous cases held the pledge violates the U.S. Constitution’s ban on the establishment of religion.”) In the past few years, the federal Courts of Appeal for “>Ninth Circuit upheld the constitutionality of “Under God” in the pledge, in part because the Supreme Court