Violation Of The Establishment Clause In The Public School Violament

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.

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).

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).

Charles Sumner fought the country’s first school integration case, “Sarah C. Roberts v. The City of Boston” in 1849. The court ruled that school segregation was neither irrational nor unlawful. The Massachusetts legislature later passed law prohibiting school segregation, in 1855.

The Establishment Clause guarantees the separation of church and government. Christian Theism is the default state doctrinal religion. As opposed to being something to fear , it was believed to be vital to the success of our government. Consequently, framers feared a state denominational religion not a state doctrinal religion. The Supreme Court established various tests to assess the constitutionality of laws that happened before it. The Lemon Test, has three parts addressing purpose, effect, and involvement. To pass the test, government action must be used only for a secular purpose; cannot promote neither prohibit a specific religion. As well as to not substantially involve government in religious matters. Failure on any one of the three

The father, a nonbeliever, fought that the words "under God" in the Pledge abused the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses of the First Amendment and that the school region's recitation arrangement was

In response to the Supreme Court’s ruling in the Santa Fe Independent School District V. Doe (SFISD V. Doe) case, Chief Justice Rehnquist commented, “It [the ruling] bristles with hostility to all things religious in public life” (“United”). Separating religion and state has always been a matter of concern for the United States, as shown by the Establishment Clause in the First Amendment of our constitution. Although there have been many cases revolving around the relationship between the church and the state, SFISD V. Doe is among the most notable. By examining the background, reflecting on the decision, and analyzing the impact of the SFISD V. Doe case,

By applying the Coercion Test, the court will find that the school board did coerce their impressionable students to attend biased board meetings and to partake in Christian prayer. “The constitution guarantees that government may not coerce anyone to support or participate in religion or its exercise, or otherwise act in a way which establishes a religion or religious faith.” Lee, 505 U.S at 585. The Coercion Test protects school-aged children from

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.

The Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe stated that student-led/ student-initiated prayer at high school football games violated the establishment clause of the first amendment. The Baptist religion was promoted in the Santa Fe Independent School District in Texas, which is located between Galveston and Houston. A teacher handed out flyers for a “revival meeting” which involved reading the bible and other Catholic things. They offered prayer up to God at graduations, assemblies, and football games. One mormon student and mother filed suit against the school district. Also, one catholic student and mother filed suit against the school district. Their lawsuit involved that the Establishment Clause was violated many times. They did not

aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another," (Hudson), as the Establishment Clause was defined by the Supreme Court Justices to mean by the case decision of Everson v. The Board of Education (1947). Any theological discussion about this prayer is left to religious schools outside of public schools, in which enrollment is not enforced and is based solely upon the parent's wishes. The prayer is only twelve seconds in duration, out of the 86,400 seconds in a day, and the same length , if not less, than that of the Pledge. Also, one of the seven principles of the Constitution is popular sovereignty, which means the majority vote of the people rules. Only the parents of ten pupils took this issue to court. That’s ten out of hundreds of students in the school district. Obviously, the majority is in favor of this prayer and the minority's wishes are still respected since they are given the choice to sit out of this

Over five years have passed since high school senior Joseph Frederick was suspended for 10 days by school principal Deborah Morse after refusing her request to take down a 14-foot banner he was displaying at a school-sanctioned event which read “BONG HiTS 4 JESUS.” Born as a seemingly trivial civil lawsuit in which Frederick sued the school for violating his First Amendment rights to free speech, the case made its way up to the U.S. Supreme Court, and the long-awaited ruling of Morse v. Frederick has finally been released. In a 5-4 split decision, the court ruled in favor of Morse and upheld the school board’s original ruling that Morse was acting within her rights and did not violate Frederick’s First Amendment rights by taking away his

In concurrence with King, requiring professors in Christian Charter schools to refrain from wearing non-Christian articles of faith is not a reasonable infringement of Section 2(a) of the Charter. The Oakes test was conducted to deduce that the Charter infringement is not justifiable in a free and democratic society. The first step of the Oakes test is to determine if the infringement is “prescribed by law”. A common law rule or regulation, in addition to legislation can constitute a limit “prescribed by law” (Sharpe & Roach, 2013, p66).

The first part of the lemon test refers to having a secular purpose. This is asking whether or not there is a religious or spiritual basis in the activity or teaching. If the answer is no, then there is not a violation of the law. If it is proven that there is a secular purpose, then it would be in violation of the establishment clause. The second part of the lemon test says that is must neither advance nor inhibit religion. So essentially, religion conversation or discussion should be left out of an activity. This is either in support of, or demonstrative actions towards religion. The third part of the lemon tests says that it must not create excessive government entanglement with religion. If any of these three parts or violated, then the act is in violation of the law (http://nationalparalegal.edu/conLawCrimProc_Public/FreedomOfExpression/FreedomOfReligion&EstCl.asp.)

Many people today have their own personal beliefs. In a school setting, there have been many controversial situations that have been brought to court to help resolve individual rights. As National Coalition Against Censorship (2017) stated, the First Amendment guarantees of religious liberty include the freedom to believe or not to believe, to observe one’s faith openly without government interference, Freedom of speech encompasses religious as well as secular speech, but the Establishment Clause is where Thomas Jefferson described it as “a wall of separation between church and state”, because it has important implications for religious speech and observance in public schools” (Retrieved from http://ncac.org/resource/the-first-amendment-in-schools-resource-guide-religious-expression-in-the-public-schools). For this paper, legal issues regarding grading of assignment, appropriate of displaying student’s work, application of First Amendment to scenario, and conclusion will be discussed.