The, Anti Evolution And The State Of Arkansas

Decent Essays

Facts: The parties in this case are the appellant, Susan Epperson an Arkansas public high school teacher, and the State of Arkansas. Ms. Epperson brought legal action against the State of Arkansas in order to challenge the Constitutional legitimacy of the State’s “Anti-evolution” law. The “Anti-evolution” law made it illegal for any teacher in a state supported school to teach evolution or to use a book, which included the theory. Ms. Epperson believed the State’s prohibition of teaching evolution violated her Constitutional rights and thus initiated legal action in the courts. While the main facts of the case are those stated above, there are several other peripheral facts that are significant in this case. One of those peripheral facts is Arkansas’s “Anti-evolution” law appeared to be a product of an increase in “fundamentalism” in the State. According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, fundamentalism is a form of Christianity that believes in the historic accuracy of the Bible. Therefore, fundamentalist generally oppose the theory of evolution. (Sandeen & Melton) Another peripheral fact is Arkansas location in the “Bible belt” of America, which added to the religious tension surrounding the case. The final peripheral fact worth mentioning is the Arkansas “Anti-evolution” law was seemingly an adaptation of the “monkey law” in Tennessee, which was upheld by the Tennessee Supreme Court in the famous Scopes case of 1927. Procedural History: Legal action was originally

Get Access