The court threw out the case because Newdow did not have legal custody of his child, so he had no legal basis on which to argue the case on her behalf. He could not show that he was being harmed by the pledge, since the custodial parent (the mother) agrees with it.
There are many parents who do have custodial rights who are dissatisfied with the pledge. I think it's only a matter of time until this case is heard and the core issue examined.
Personally, I do think that teachers leading children in the chant does amount to a state endorsement of a religious idea, which is clearly unconstitutional. Besides that, don't you think the pledge sounds better in its original form? For me it is much more inspiring:
One nation,
Indivisible,
With liberty and justice for all.
Now those are words everyone can live by.
SNG