Amish Legal Case Study

There are lots of different situations where students of a public school are deprived of their right of free expression given in the fourth amendment. One example of this is the case of Engel vs Vitale. This court case took place in 1962 when a parent of a child sued because of a New York State law that required students to recite a nondenominational prayer every morning, "Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and beg Thy blessings upon us, our teachers, and our country”. This law goes against the Establishment of Religion clause of the fourth amendment. Another violation of The Bill of Rights is the Tinker v. Des Moines case. This case took place in 1969 when two students, MaryBeth Tinker, and her brother wore black armbands to protest the Vietnam war. However, the result of this action, according to the article, Supreme Court Landmarks from the United States Courts, “ Fearing a disruption, the

The case law defines the First Amendment, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a

Regardless of how the phrase and the autonomy of the First Amendment is challenged, religion and the need to maintain separation of church and state has been a great contest of the United States legal systems. The court system typically will remove itself from decisions within the higher education institution and leave such decisions to the administrators themselves to make the best decision for the organization, unless those topics in question legitimately violate a federal statute or clause related to the Constitution directly (McFarlane, 2012). Therefore, we will examine the application of the First Amendment within higher education.

The First Amendment is designed to protect all citizens by giving them the right to express themselves in different ways. In doing so, we still have to be careful on how we do it. Students have the right to express themselves as long as it does not cause any disruption. In my school district, we abides by the First Amendment by not forbidding all mention of religion in the school system (Pamlico County Board of Education, 2015). The only part that is prohibited is the advancement or inhibition of religion (Pamlico County Board of Education, 2015). My school district feels that there’s nothing unconstitutional about using religious subjects or materials as long as it is in compliance to the neutrality of the education program (Pamlico County Board of Education, 2015).

Freedom of religion means that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” (Jacobus 93). “Free exercise” does not always mean “free exercise”. The Supreme Court has been forced to put certain limitations on the practice of religion. (Wilson, Dilulio, & Bose, 95). For instance people are not allowed to

The controversy between marriage equality and the exercise of religious freedom is a confliction between nondiscrimination laws and religious freedom laws. Religious freedom seemed to be an important aspect of an American citizen, after all it is the very first amendment to the constitution. With each American citizen being granted equality by the Civil Rights Act of 1964, discrimination made against an individual based on his/her sexual preference may seem to violate this act. In history, religious organizations typically been immune from state and local laws prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation. However, with the cases of Obergefell v. Hodges and Kim Davis this stance is challenged.

One of the protections offered in the Bill of rights is the free exercise of religion. The first amendment contained in the Bill of rights stated that “congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” (Ginsberg, et al. 2015, P. 122). The freedom of religion is a great example of one of the protections contained in the bill of rights. The first amendment and the freedom of religion contain an establishment clause. This limit of governmental power puts a separation between the church and state. The Government, for instance, is not allowed to establish an official church and may not take sides among

A very popular constitutional issue in America is the First Amendment. The First Amendment is meant to protect, but in today’s society it is being questioned that the argument is being overly used. The First Amendment of the United States Constitution protects the right to freedom of religion and freedom of expression from government interference (Esmaili). Freedom of religion created the separation of church and state. It prohibits the government from interfering with a person's practice of their religion. The right to freedom of speech allows individuals to express themselves without government interference or regulation. The right of freedom of expression gives the right to assemble and gather for peaceful and lawful purposes. It was adopted into the Bill of Rights in 1791. The Court later interpreted the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as protecting the rights in the First Amendment from interference by state governments. Putting this is layman’s term, you can pretty much say what you want without being penalized.

Cases that involve the First Amendment in school systems have always been around but the issue of finding a balance with these freedoms is

The 1st amendment protects US citizens, both natural born and naturalized, from undue censorship by the state and federal government in the free speech clause. The 1st amendment is only compromised in the event of national security, which is supported in Schenk v. United States and affirmed in Abrams v. United States 250 U.S. 616 (1919). Government speech has been assumed in situations where government funding is involved, however, there has been an expectation of private speech in those areas as well. Private speech and government speech often exist in the same spheres, where government speech cannot prevail without trampling the other, and private speech cannot exist wholly without government permission where federal funding is found. An example of this is found in Rosenberger v. Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia, where the Court ruled that the University of Virginia’s refusal to fund student Rosenberger’s publication Wide Awake: A Christian’s Perspective to the University of Virginia was a violation of free speech. Despite the University being a federally and publically funded institution, private speech discussing religion is permitted in the same space as government speech, on the grounds of ensuring equality across the campus. The Court found that if the University was funding secular student magazines publications were being funded, it would only be equal if religious publications received funding. The Court ruled also that the funding of

coming over from previous mother country, England. In fact it was so important it was part of the very 1st amendment, including freedom of speech, and freedom of the press. Since then it has been a struggle to determine whether or not certain instances would qualify as hindering the 1st’s claim to the right of Religion. An important case where that occurred is the Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye V.S. City of Hialeah (1993). In the case the city of Hialeah is targeting a specific group based on their religious views. On the other side of the fence the church group argues that the state laws are going against the first amendment right to religion.

In case study V, Adam of the Amish community has suffered a fracture to his hip resulting in the need for surgery. We will assess the challenges the nurse is faced with in assisting Adam and his wife Sara make a healthcare choice. They have voiced concerns about the financial expenses as they have no medical insurance. They have also inquired about the possibility of using a folk healer. This nurse will need to assess her own understanding of culturally competency nursing care to provide holistic nursing care to this couple. In this study, we will investigate options in developing a plan of care that encompasses both modern medicine and their Amish traditions.

Local Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) are controversial in nature, because while they pretend to use the excuse to protect the free exercise of religion, intrinsically it is an avenue to attack same sex marriages which have been ruled constitutional by most circuit appellate courts in the United States. Currently the Supreme Court is hearing the cases that might ultimately decide the faith of marriage equality. United States v. Windsor opened the door for most federal appellate jurisdictions and some states to rule that prohibiting same-sex marriage was constitutional, on the basis of the 14th Amendment equal protection clause. Despite this decision, the right to marriage is not an explicit protection addressed by the Constitution, and is often seen as a right delegated to the States under the 10th Amendment. On the other hand the free exercise clause is part of the First Amendment, and protects people from doing things that violate their religious principle, for example a Christian doctor from performing an abortion.

This argument is based on information found on oyez.org. In 1963 a federal program, Higher Education Facilities, created grants for educational institutions. These institutions were sponsored by local churches. The grant specifically said the new buildings could have no religious associations for twenty years. After the twenty year period, the building could be used for any purpose the church needed it to. The grant attempted to neutralize the moral background that may influence the college students in the new building. In 1970 a law suit was filed. The sponsors believed if they were sponsoring these educational institutions, they should be able to use the building for religious reasons. In 1971 the court decided the twenty year wait for the building to be able to be used for any recreational purpose was unconstitutional. The court argued grants are considered federal aid; therefore, the federal government has no right to intervene with religious purpose. The first amendment claims the federal government cannot deny anyone of practicing religion anywhere including in a granted building. The court also said since the money was not used to fund religious activity the building was like any other building. The court believed college students would be able to decide with their own opinions on rather to attend these church services. The services were not mandatory to attend. Also, the court decided the period

Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003). The case of Lawrence v. Texas brought the supreme court to the decision that adults have the right to engage in private, consensual sex, thereby ruling that adults have a constitutional right to engage in private homosexual conduct if they choose. A reasonable person reading Lawrence v. Texas may come to the conclusion that along with the right to sexual autonomy lays is the right to spend money to exercise the right. With that being said you could apply the same logic to other Supreme Court cases such