Rachel Pratt
EDUC-A 308
24 March 2015
Issue Paper Detailed Outline
Step One: Summarize the issue you have chosen and state the position you will argue.
I am going to argue that the fourth grade teacher who posted a banner in his room that said “What Would Jesus Do?” has violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. In order to avoid violating this clause, the banner must pass every prong of the Lemon test. However, this particular banner does not.
Step Two: List the legal standards and how they will apply to your case and argument.
The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment is the legal standard that pertains to this particular argument. When assessing whether the banner in question violates the Establishment Clause,
…show more content…
Case One: Stone v. Graham Supreme Court of the United States 449 U.S. 39
In this case, petitioner private citizens filed a suit against the superintendent of public schools in Kentucky, James Graham. Sydell and a number of other parents challenged the Kentucky state law requiring the posting of the Ten Commandments in every public school classroom. Each plaque would be purchased with private contributions and would have that statement, “The secular application of the Ten Commandments is clearly seen in its adoption as the fundamental legal code of Western Civilization and the Common Law of the United States.” The private citizens claimed that the statue violated the First Amendment and sought an injunction against its enforcement. The state supreme court held that the statue’s purpose was secular and it would neither advance nor inhibit any religion or religious group nor involve the state excessively in religious matters. On appeal, the United States Supreme Court held that the statue had no secular legislative purpose and was, therefore, unconstitutional. The purpose for posting the Ten Commandments was clearly religious due to the fact that they are sacred in the Jewish and Christian faiths, therefore violating the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. This particular case will support my argument by confirming that hanging up items on school walls that do
Constitution's First Amendment requirement that the District neither establish religion in the schools nor prohibit students’ free exercise of religion according to pertinent interpretation and application of those constitutional provisions by the courts. Any religious characters need to conform to policy 8800” (Markesan District School, 2013). “Decisions of the United States Supreme Court have made it clear that it is not the province of a public school to advance or inhibit religious beliefs or practices” (Markesan District School, 2015). Under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution, this remains the “inviolate province of the individual and the church of his/her choice. The rights of any minority, no matter how small, must be protected. District staff members shall not use prayer, religious readings, or religious symbols as a devotional exercise or in an act of worship or celebration” (20 U.S.C. 4071 et seq.) (Markesan District School, 2015). Having examined the Markesan District School First Amendment related to this topic the next step is to conclude my research on this topic.
This amendment evidently states that everyone in the United States is entitled to practice the religion of his or her choice and the right to voice his or her opinions. After a careful analysis, the District Court “question[ed] whether the First Amendment impose[d] any barrier to the establishment of an official religion by the state of Alabama” (Wallace V. Jaffree). The District Court considered the First Amendment of the US Constitution as clearly prohibiting the federal government from setting up a state church. Yet, when the First Amendment was ratified, there was no section preventing state governments from establishing a church. The District Court interpreted the First Amendment as emphasizing freedom of religion to all, including in the state of Alabama. Shortly after this analysis, the District Court concluded, “the establishment clause of the first amendment to the United States Constitution does not prohibit the state from establishing a religion” (Wallace V. Jaffree). Thus, the one-minute period of meditation or voluntary prayer in Alabama’s public schools was acceptable because the state was entitled to freedom of religion.
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).
Part 5: Connect the argument with facts that prove your points. Note the areas of objections and offer concessions if needed.
1. Identify the key problem in the case and explaining why it is the key problem.
Historically, legal issues regarding the grading of assignments containing religious material have come to similar decisions. In Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969), a group of students decided to express their views about Vietnam by wearing black armbands to school. Although the district attempted to punish them for this, the Supreme Court ruled that the students were expressing a form of “symbolic speech” and were protected by the First Amendment, as long as it did not disrupt normal school functions. Similarly, expressing views of religion in school is protected if it does not disturb the educational process. According to Haynes and Oliver (2007), students have the right to express religious beliefs “in homework, artwork, and other written and oral assignments free from discrimination based on the religious content of their submissions” (p. 65). An educator must
The Lemon Test, which was created in a case called Lemon V. Kurtzman, consists of three “prongs” (Speich 275). They are that “governmental action be supported by a secular purpose, that it not have the principal or primary effect of advancing or inhibiting religion, and that it ‘not foster “an excessive governmental entanglement with religion.”’” (qtd. in Conkle). In other words, the first “prong” requires the court to question the intent of the government or group in charge of creating the policy; the second prong asks the court to determine the result of the policy and its effects on religion, and the last “prong” asks the court to not complicate the dynamic of the church and the state (Speich 275). The Endorsement test is used after the first two prongs of the lemon test have been verified. First occurring in Lynch V. Donnelly, the Endorsement test states that the “government cannot endorse, favor, promote, or prefer any religious belief or practice” (Speich 277). The test asks the judges if the policy in question merely looks like it endorses religion. The Coercion test, which is sometimes used instead of the lemon test such as in Lee v. Weisman case, asks if the policy tricks members of the minority or “dissenting” religion into participating (Schweitzer; Speich 278).
The case of Wallace v. Jaffree calls into question the constitutionality of an Alabama statute that authorized teachers to lead a one-minute period of silence for “meditation or voluntary” prayer in all public schools. Ishmael Jaffree, the parent of three students in the Mobile County Public School system filed a complaint that two of his three children had been “subjected to various acts of religious indoctrination,” as a result of Alabama statute 16-1-20.1 and asked for an injunction prohibiting Mobile County schools from “maintaining or allowing the maintenance of regular religious prayer services.” The purpose of Jaffree’s complaint was to prohibit the devotional services occurring in his children’s school and the consequent mockery of his children that occurred when they refused to recite the prayers to “Almighty God” (Stevens, 40). This type of law in Alabama public schools was not the first of its kind. Prior to statute 6-11-20.1, Alabama passed law 16-1-20 authorizing one minute of silence in public schools for meditation. After the authorization of statute 16-1-20.1 came 16-1-20.2, which allowed teachers to lead “willing students” in a prayer (Stevens, 40).
The right to freedom of expression of ones religion is at stake in this case. Mrs. Williams has a right to express her religion freely. However, based upon the Establishment Clause which prohibits any law “respecting the establishment of religion”, she does not have the right to force others to conform to her way of thinking. At the same time, students and community members have a right to express their religion, too. They also have a right not to have another person’s religion forced on them. So there is only one individual right at stake here, but it is not possible to respect this right of behalf of all the claimants. While the majority of the community, the school board, and some students will feel that it is Mrs. Williams’ right to keep the bulletin board posted, some community members, students, and ACLU feel it is their right not to keep it posted.
When talking about the First Amendment, the law protects us from freedom of speech and free exercise of religion and it also stops Congress from making any new law to prohibit free speech and free exercise. The case involving a Christian printer who refused to print gay pride T-shirts. The printer declined the printing job for T-shirts promoting a gay pride festival on religious grounds, but he did offer the customer to help them find other local printers to do the work for the same price. Based on the information that was provided the printer had a history of rejecting other orders for shirts promoting sexually explicit material/actions and violence.
First, posting the Ten Commandments is a solution in search of a non-existent problem. Religious Right rhetoric notwithstanding, religion and prayer have not been banned from public schools; in fact the First Amendment protects students' rights to pray, discuss religious views and read religious texts in school. Second, posting the Ten Commandments would violate the First Amendment by requiring schools to favor one religion over another; the Supreme Court ruled so in 1980.
This banner to some could be seen as offensive, and Morse has the choice to either take action, or to allow this banner and face consequences. She chose to take action, and uphold the school's policy. Fredericks banner violated the school’s policy. It promoted the use of illegal drugs, and although Frederick arrived late to school, he still arrived at a school event, monitored by school officials, who in turn were in charge of him. Schools have the right to confiscate any item that violates their policies, and Frederick's displaying of his banner was violating a policy. Although Frederick does have the First Amendment right to wield his banner, the school policy clearly states that nothing promoting illegal drugs is allowed. If Frederick was attending an event not approved or monitored by the school, he would have been free to display whatever he wished. Just because Frederick had the first Amendment right, schools do not have to tolerate any actions or expressions that could contribute to any dangers of their students, such as illegal drug use. In conclusion, Principal Morse had the right to take away Frederick’s banner, and is innocent of any violation of Frederick's First Amendment
In cases having to do with constitutionality, the issue of the separation of church and state arises with marked frequency. This battle, which has raged since the nation?s founding, touches the very heart of the United States public, and pits two of the country's most important influences of public opinion against one another. Although some material containing religious content has found its way into many of the nation's public schools, its inclusion stems from its contextual and historical importance, which is heavily supported by material evidence and documentation. It often results from a teacher?s own decision, rather than from a decision handed down from above by a higher power. The proposal of the Dover Area School District to
It is impossible to talk about American laws without talking about the source of those laws. Following the revolution, Americans were trying to instill a government that that was nothing like the monarchy they had freed themselves from. This led to the writing of the Constitution and the federalist paper, a group of documents written by early patriots, which were to increase support for the Constitution for ratification. During this time, the Articles of Confederation were use as a loose set of rules establishing a very weak central government that had no power over the states. This was done to prevent past mistakes with King George. Alexander Hamilton, James Madison (even though some scholars believe Madison was given too much credit) (Gerber
Section Two: Present the position that you most agree with. Then, give ample evidence to