Use the internet to look up one of the following Supreme Court cases that involved freedom of religion.
- McCollum vs Board of Education- 1948
- Zorach vs. Clauson- 1952
- Engel vs. Vitale- 1962
- Reynolds vs. U.S- 1879
- Abington School District vs. Schmepp-1963
1. Briefly summarize the background information and situation at hand.
2. Did the action violate the 1st amendment or were the actions protected by the 1st amendment?
3. What was the final vote count?
4. What was the reason for the court's decision?
Value: 10 points
Due: Monday, Oct. 25
42 comments:
Reynolds v. United States
Reynolds was married to 2 wives and was indicted for bigamy. I do not agree with what he did but I don't think he was violating the 1st amendment because some religions men have more than one wife. The final vote was 9 to 0 guilty. Poligumy is not protected by the 1st amendment.
Abington School District v. Schempp :
1. The Abington case concerns Bible-reading in Pennsylvania public schools. students who attended public schools in the state of Pennsylvania were required to read at least ten verses from the Bible. After completing these readings, school authorities required all Abington Township students to recite the Lord's Prayer. Students could be excluded from these exercises by a written note from their parents to the school.
2. yes
3. The final vote count was 8 votes for Schempp, 1 vote against.
4. The required activities encroached on both The Free Exercise of Religion clause and the Establishment clause of the amendment since the readings were essentially religious ceremonies and were intended by the state to do so.
1. A Public school in Illinois gave kids the opportunity to learn about their religion as long as they had their parents permission and some parents didn't like this idea at all, they thought it violated the separation of Church and state.
2. Yes, this action did violate the first amendment
3. 6-1
4. The reason of the courts were to keep seperate the church and state and to say to parents if they want their children to learn about their religion send them to a religious class and keep it out of public schools
The McCollum vs Board of Education case of 1948 was a dispute over if students should have to participate in religion class or not, at school during classes. A mother of her child was an Atheist and the school offered classes from Roman Catholic Priests or Protestant Ministers. If students who chose not to attend they would have to sit quietly until the religion class was over until they could proceed with their other academic classes. Mrs.McCollum thought that this way of teaching was violating the separation of Church, state, and also the 1st Amendment. The case made it up to the Supreme Court and was decided over a 6-1 vote and agreed with Mrs. McCollum that the invalidated practice of having religious education in public schools during the school day.
The case Engel Vs Vitale was brought by the families of public school students in New Hyde Park, New York who complained that the voluntary prayer to "Almighty God" contradicted their religious beliefs. They were supported by groups opposed to the school prayer including rabbinical organizations, Ethical Culture, and Judaic organizations. The plaintiffs argued that opening the school day with such a prayer violates the Establishment Clause of the 1st Amendment of the United States Constitution, which says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion." The court eventually ruled that the government written prayers could not be required to be recited in public schools and was an unconstitutional violation of the Establishment Clause. So yes, this act did violate the 1st Amendment. The final vote count was 6-1. The reason for the courts decision, was that a school prayers is a religious activity, and prescribing a religious activity for children who are in school violates the Establishment Clause.The program, created by government officials to promote a religious belief, was made constitutionally impermissible.
In the trial Reynold vs US in 1979, in Salt Lake City, Utah,
the defendant George Reynolds was being tried for the crime of Bigamy. This is when you are married and marry someone else in the US while being married to that other person. I think this is not protected by the first amendement because there is a law that says you are not aloud to do it. The law was not said to be uncostitutional, there it must be followed. I can see how there would be a disbute about if this violates it or not, but in the end, it's obvious that it is not protected by the first Amendenment. After a long and stressful case, the final verdict was that the man was guitly of bigamy. He was fined 500$ and had to spend 2 years in jail.
.:McCollum v. Board of Education:.
In 1940,various Protestant, Catholic, and Jewish faiths formed an association named the Champaign Council on Religious Education. This association sought and obtained permission from the Champaign Board of Education to offer voluntary religious education classes for public school students from grades four to nine. These weekly 30- and 45-minute classes were led by clergy and lay members of the association in public school classrooms during school hours.
McCollum-an atheist-objected to the religious classes, and stated that her son James was ostracized for not attending the religious classes. After complaints to school officials to stop offering these classes went unheeded, McCollum sued the school board in July 1945, stating that the religious instruction in the public schools violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment—the principle of separation of church and state in the United States. The action did violate the first amendment. The Court ruled 8-1 in favor of McCollum, ruling that the classes were unconstitutional. The courts explanation for it was that the child did not have to attend the class if he was atheist and that is protected by the first amendment and it was violated.
Reynolds v. U.S. 1879- The Mormon belief allowed men to have more than one wife but the Morrill Anti-Bigamy Act was directed to Mormon belief stating that they couldn't have more than one wife. George Reynolds, one day, wanted to marry Amelia Jane Schofield while he was still married to his first wife Mary Ann Tuddenham, which follows his belief. The Morrill Anti-Bigamy Act stopped him from doing so and took him to court trying to charge him with bigamy. Reynolds' actions were protected by the first amendment. The jury voted nine to zero in favor of Reynolds. The reason for the court's decision is that it was because of his Mormon religion, he was allowed to marry many women.
McCollum vs Board of Education- 1948
what happened during this was that there were Jewish, Catholic, and Protestant groups that taught classes about religion, students that didn't participate had to go elsewhere.Mrs. Vashti McCollum was an atheist mother of one of the students and complained that it separated church and state. The Action violated the first Amendment.It was a 6-1 vote. The reason for the courts decision was that it violated the separation of church and state.
Engel vs. Vitale- 1962
In 1951 the New York State Board of Regents passed a 22 word prayer that would be said every morning in New York public schools. Parents of ten pupils in the New Hyde Park schools objected to the prayer. They filed in a suit in a New York State court seeking a ban on the prayer. The court decided that this did violate the 1st Amendment. The final vote count of the case was 6:1. The court decided to affirm the separation of church and state. The reason for this decision is because they found the prayer unconstitutional.
Abington School District vs. Schempp
1. This case was about the Abington School District using the bible in their public schools. The students were required to read 10 verses from the bible and after completeing the readings they had to recite the Lord's Prayer. Students could get out of the assignment with only a written note from their parents.
2. The action not only violated their 1st but 14th amendment also because it was a religious ceremony being held in a public school where many religions are practiced. It violated the freedom of religion, conlaw, establishment of religion, and education rights.
3. The final vote count was 8 vots for Schempp and 1 vote against.
4. the reason for the courts decision was that it violated was with a parent note to exclude the child from these assignments was not irrelevant because it did not prevent the school's actions from breakingthe Establishment Clause.
McCOLLUM V. BOARD OF EDUCATION - 1948
1. Vashti McCollum was the mother of a student who attended school in the Champaign public school district. People in Champaign who were of Catholic, Protestant, and Jewish faiths started an organization called the Champaign Council on Religious Education. This board wanted voluntary 30-45 minute religious classes for those interested. This was eventually agreed to by Champaign officials. McCollum, a devoted atheist, was heavily against these classes, and also stated that her son James was ostracized for not attending religious classes. So, in July 1945, she sued the school board. Eventually, the local court ruled in favor of the school board, so she appealed, and eventually the case landed on the Illinois supreme court. They too voted in favor of the school board. Finally, in December 1947, McCollum appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
2. Yes, the actions 1st amendment rights were violated and the court ruled in favor of McCollum. Thus, the lower court's rulings were reversed.
3. The vote count was 8-1.
4. The state’s tax supported public school buildings used for the dissemination of religious doctrine is not separation of Church and State.
McCollum vs. Board of Education- 1948
McCollum vs. Board of Education- 1948, was a situation about religion. A public school though it would be a good idea to start a religion class during the school day. There would be a choice of, Jewish, Roman Catholic, and a few Protestant classes. Students would be able to chose what religion they wanted to sit in on but they would need to have a permission slip signed to be able to attend the class. Students attending the religion corses would go to that class and the children who did not attend would have to sit in a room and be given work to do. A child could not just not go to school because they would be marked absent. If you came and you were not taking one of the religion classes the kids would just sit in a room and do nothing while the other kids were leaning on school hours. A lady named Mrs. McCollum though this was really bad idea. So, she brought this case to court to see what they though about it. They said that this situation violated the 1st Amendment because it said that you should not mix religion with state. People should be able to practice their religion but they should do it outside of school, not during school. When the court when over this incident the final count was 6-1. The reason why the court agreed with Mrs. McCollum was because it , “invalidated the practice of having religious education in public schools during the school day.”
http://atheism.about.com/library/decisions/religion/bl_l_McCollumBoard.htm
In this case the Champaign Board of education provided classes in religion to public school students during the school day. If a student wanted to attend they had to get a permission slip signed by their parents. Mrs. McCollum was an atheist and a mother of a student in that school system who complained that the program violated the separation of church and state and the first amendment.
Yes the action violated the 1st amemndment.
The final vote wwas 6-1.
THe reason for the courts decision was the court said that the use of tax-supported property for religious teaching and the close cooperation between the school authorities and the religious council violated the establishment clause.
McCollum vs. Board of Education:
Background: Protestant, Catholic, and Jewish people, set up an association in the public school board to offer voluntary religious education classes in the school district. McCollum, and atheist, said that her son was ostracized for not going to the class. She complained about removing the classes, when it wasn't she sued the board of education.
The action of having religious classes in school violated the first ammendment.
The final vote was 6:1 in McCollum's favor.
The reason for the court's decision was that by using tax- established and supported public schools to teach religion the government was aiding the groups to spread their religion, and it was a law that kids were required to go to school and be in every class.
McCollum v. Board of Education
Case basics
Docket No.: 90
Petitioner: McCollum
Respondent: Board of Education Dist. 71
Decided By:Vinson Court (1946-1949)
Opinion: 333 U.S. 203 (1948)
Argued: Monday, December 8, 1947
Decided: Monday, March 8, 1948
Facts of the Case:
In 1940, members of the Jewish, Roman Catholic, and some Protestant faiths formed a voluntary association called the Champaign (Illinois) Council on Religious Education. Cooperating with the Champaign Board of Education, the Council offered voluntary classes in religious instruction to public school pupils. The courses were conducted in the regular classrooms of the school building. Students who did not attend the religious instruction were required to go to some other place in the building to pursue secular studies.
The use of the public school system for religious classes violate the First Amendment's Establishment Clause. The Court held that the use of tax-supported property for religious instruction and the close cooperation between the school authorities and the religious council violated the Establishment clause. Because pupils were required to attend school and were released in part from this legal duty if they attended the religious classes, the Court found that the Champaign system was "beyond question a utilization of the tax-established and tax-supported public school system to aid religious groups and to spread the faith."
Issue:
Whether the Champaign Board of Education allowance of religious teachers to substitute their religious teaching for secular education once a week for thirty minutes violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
Holding:
By an 8-1 vote, the Court ruled that the practice of allowing outside religious instructors into the classroom during the school day violates the Establishment Clause by providing government assistance to facilitate the mission of sectarian groups.
Reasoning:
The Court found that allowing religious instruction on school grounds, during the school day, provided assistance to sectarian organizations by "providing pupils for their religious classes through use of the State’s compulsory public school machinery." This arrangement was found to unconstitutionally advance religion and confer upon it symbolic government endorsement.
Majority:
"To hold that a state cannot consistently with the First and Fourteenth Amendments utilize its public school system to aid any or all religious faiths or sects in the dissemination of their doctrines and ideals does not, as counsel urge, manifest a governmental hostility to religion or religious teachings." (Justice Hugo Black)
Dissent:
"The prohibition of enactments respecting the establishment of religion do not bar every friendly gesture between church and state." (Justice Stanley Reed)
1. In 1940 a voluntary association was created called the Champaign (Illinois) Council. They wanted religious classes for public school students.
2. Yes, the court decided that it was a violation of the first amendment since it was tax supported property. They didn't want the public schools to be used for religious instruction.
3. The final vote count was 8-1.
4. The Court said that the Champaign system was "beyond question a utilization of the tax-established and tax-supported public school system to aid religious groups and to spread the faith"
Zorach v. Clauson
Zorach and other taxpayers and residents of New York City, brought suit challenging the constitutionality of a “released time” program. This allowed children to leave school, with their parents permission, to recieve religious teaching.
The release time program seems to be covered by the by the first admendment.
The ruling of the supreme court would be in favor of the release time program. the court really could not say no.
the court really could not say anything against the exercise of religion. Voting for one religion over another would violate the first admentment.
Engel Vs Vitale
The Board of Regents in N.Y.C. wanted for schools to start the day with a voluntary prayer. It was an attempt to defuse the politically potent issue by taking it out of the hands of local communities. Yes it was a violation of the 1st amendment. The final Vote was 6 for Engal and 1 for Vitale. THe prayer was nondenominational and nor was it voluntary.
Abington School District vs. Schempp
Public school students in Pennsylvania had to read at least 10 verses from the Bible at the beginning of the school day. After that, the Abington Township students had to recited the Lord's Prayer. The only way that the children could get out of the readings was if they had a note from their parents.The Schempp family challenged the state law saying that it was unconstitutional in supporting religion and specific denominations at that.
This act was a violation of the 1st amendment. It encroached on the the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment.
The count ruled 8-1 against the reciting of the Lord's Prayer and the reading of the Bible verses.
The court decided that it was a violation because the Constitution forbids any establishment of religion and prayer is a form of religion. Therefore mandated Bible readings in public schools cannot be allowed.
- Abington School District vs. Schmepp-1963
This case was caused because people were having problems with public schools reading the bible in pennsylvania. At the beginning of the school day, students were required to read at least ten verses from the Bible. After completing these readings, school authorities required all students to say the Our Father. Students could only be excluded from these exercises by a written note from their parents to the school. This violates the first amendment because it is a public school and there is freedom of religion. The final vote of the court was 8/1 with only one opposing
Nick McGinley
Reynolds v. United States
The mormons were a religious polygamists who settled in Utah in the 1800's. In this case George Reynolds was the Petitioner. Before the Morrill Act was passed, there was no law stating that any persons could only have one spouse. The Mormons allowed the men to have more that one spouse, until President Lincoln passed the Morrill Act making it illegal.
In Reynolds defense, he said that it was unconstitutional and that polygamy is part of his religion, therefore being allowed to practice his religion.
In my opinion I believe his fourth and first rights were violated. But after the law was passed, he pursued his religious destiny and broke the law and it caused him to be found guilty at court. In 1879 Reynolds was found guilty; final vote 9-0
McCollum vs Board of Education- 1948
The case was over religious education in public schools. a form was sent home for familys to decide which rligion they wanted there children to be taught.the choices were between Catholic, Protestant, and Jewish instruction. this action did violate the students first amendment.the final vote count was an 8-1 decision ruling that this was unconstitutional. the court decided on this because the constitutional ban on establishing religion meant that all religion must be treated equally, as lawyers for Champaign argued was the case in their schools or whether it required strict neutrality between belief and unbelief
The situation of McCollum vs. Board of Education was about a mother of a student enrolled in the Champaign school district named Vashti McCollum. An association named Champaign Council on Religious Education was given permission to start offering voluntary religious education classes. McCollum who was an avowed atheist complained to the school board that her son was being ostracized for not attending. In 1945 McCollum sued the school board for violating the separation of church and state in the United States. Although the Circuit Court of Champaign Country ruled in favor of the school district, McCollum brought the case to the Supreme Court which ruled in favor of her 8-1. They ruled this way because a state cannot consistently with the First Amendments utilize its public school system to aid any or all religious faiths. I would say her 1st Amendment rights were protected.
1) In 1940, Protestants, Catholics, and Jewish faiths formed the Campaign Council and Relgious Education. This Campaign was too offer relgious teachings to students in public schools that weren't getting any relgious education from grades 4 to 9. These classes were 35 to 45 minutes long. McCollum disapproved this campaign. She claimed her son was getting excluded because he did not attend these classes. McCollum sued the school board saying that having religious classes violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, the principle of separation of church and state in the United States.
2) The Court said the act was unconstitional and did not follow the 1st amendment.
3) The Court ruled 8-1 in favor of McCollum.
4) "[The facts] show the use of tax-supported property for religious instruction and the close cooperation between the school authorities and the religious council in promoting religious education. The operation of the state's compulsory education system thus assists and is integrated with the program of religious instruction carried on by separate religious sects. Pupils compelled by law to go to school for secular education are released … in part from their legal duty upon the condition that they attend the religious classes."
1. Engel V Vitale was a landmark United States Supreme Court case that determined that it is unconstitutional for state officials to compose an official school prayer and require its recitation in public schools.
2. The action is violating the first amendment if it was manditory to say the prayer. However I will say that eliminating the prayer favors atheism which would also be violating the 1st as well.
3. Final vote count was 6 to 1.
4. Court said that whether it was required or not to say the prayer it still helps promote a religion which is a violation of 1st ammendment.
Engel v. Vitale.
This was a supreme court case that was to determine if it was unconstitutional to compose an official prayer and for it to be required to be recited. People argued that it violated the 1st amendment. Students parents were frustrated with this and took it to court. It did violate the first amendment because you have to freedom of religion and it was forced to say prayer in school at the time. The final vote count was 6-1 in favor of it being a violation. The reason for the courts decision was that it was school prayer was a religious activity and that it violates the Establishment Clause.
In the case McCollum vs Board of Education- 1948 a group of jewish, roman catholic, and protestant groups formed a champaign called the council of religious education. This champaign gave public school kids a chance to take religion classes during a school day. In order for a kid to participate in a religion class he or she had to have a permission slipped sign by his or her parent. If a student didnt want to take a religion class the student was forced to go elsewhere for secular studies, but they were not actually given any academic instruction because the school didnt want the students to get ahead of their "religious counterparts." An atheist mother of a student by the name of Mrs. Vashti McCollum complained that the system violated the seperation of church and state, and the first ammendment. The outcome of the trial was a 6-1 vote and the supreme court agreed with Mrs. McCollum. The court agreed with her because students were required by state truancy laws to go to school and attendance was monitored by state officials to make sure that children were either in religion classes or study hall, the program created a "captive audience" for the clergy. This was a significant case because it established that the first ammendment applied to the states through the due process clause of the fourth ammendment.
1. This court case is about a public school that began offering a religon class that students did not have to attend and a parent had to fill out a permission slip. If a child did not perticapate in this thne they had a study time for them. An atheist mother believed that this was a gainst the first amendement.
2. the actions were not protected by the first amendemnt and the mother was corrrect they should not have had a religon class.
3.6-1
4.the court's reasoning was that the school having these classes were against the seperstion of the church and the state.
In the Abington School District v. Schempp Supreme Court case Schempp challenged the required reading of verses of the bible and the lord's prayer in the Abingion School District. The required reading of the bible and the lord's prayer by the students was deemed a violation of there first amendment rights and therefor unconstitutional. The final vote count was 8 to 1 in favor of Schempp. The readings were decided to be "intended by the State to be so." and encroached both the Free Exercise Clause and the Establishment Clause.
Reynolds vs. US
In 1879 George Reynolds was charged with bigamy. George was a Mormon and they believe that you are aloud to be married to more than one woman. The action did violate the 1st amendment and George was found guilty. The reasons for the courts decision was because it was against the states law and they found it unconstitutional for Reynolds to be married to more than one wife at a time.
Abington School District vs. Schmepp
In 1963 in Pennsylvania in public schools there was an issue with bible reading. In the beginning of the day the students were required to read at least 10 Bible verses. If you did not want your child to read these Bible verses you could write a note letting the school know that you did not want your child to have to read these verses. Yes, this did violate the first amendment and it was found unconstitutional. The final vote count was eight to one. The reason for the courts decision was because even though the children could be excused from the act it was not preventing the schools acts to violate the Establishment Clause.
Zorach vs. Clauson
New York began a program in which students in public schools could be dismissed from classroom activities for certain periods to participate in religious instruction elsewhere. The students need to have permission from their parents in order to participate in the program. This action does not violate the 1st ammendment, it gives the kids freedom to practice their religion beliefs outside of the public school system. In a 6-3 decision the Supreme Court permitted the public school students to travel to parocnial schools to recieve religious education. The court heold that the released time program neither constituted the establishment of religion nor interfered with the free exercise of religion.
The Abington School District v Shempp case was a Supreme Court case that was held in 1963 . In the case, there was a filed suit against the Abington School District in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania to prohibit the enforcement of a Pennsylvania state law that required his children, specifically Ellory Schempp, to hear and sometimes read portions of the Bible as part of their public school education. The Court decided 8–1 in favor of the respondent, Edward Schempp, and declared school-sponsored Bible reading in public schools in the United States to be unconstitutional.
Reynolds vs. the US
This case was about George Reynold ,who was a Morman, had multiple wives even thought the state law said that you could only be married to one person at a time. This did not violate his 1st amendment right because state law said that religion should be separate from state. The court ruled that this was unconstitutional because the court said that church and state must be separate.
Zorach V. Clauson
The court case Zorach V. Clauson, was based on public schools setting aside a spare or extra period in the day for students, with parental consent, would go to religious classes once a week. These classes only lasted about an hour, while the other students who weren't involved in the religious classes were set in a study hall. The decision was made that despite the diversity in the students, it was a release in a "ordinary class room" setting for all the students. Therefore, it was said to be Constitutional. The number of votes was a 6 to 3 decision.
By: Courtney Manley
Ambington vs. Schmepp
Students attending public schools were required to read bible verses and recite the Lord's Prayer. The only way the students could get out of this was if their parent's wrote a note excusing them from this.
The First Amendment was protected. In an 8 to 1 vote, Schmepp won. This violated the Establishment Clause.
Engel vs. Vitale
1) A school offered a prayer every morning to volunteering partakers that would like to recite the prayer.
2) It was ruled out that the holding of the prayer in a public school did violate the first amendment.
3) The final vote was 6 for Engel (that the prayer be removed) to one that it be kept.
4) The reasoning for the decision was that since the prayer was allowed, New York had approved religion.
Reynolds v. USA
1. The case was that Reynolds had two wives and it was part of his religion to have more than one.
2. I don't agree with what he did but i respect his religion. I don't think he violated the 1st amendment.
3.The final vote was 9 votes for USA, 0 votes for Reynolds.
4. The reason for the courts outcome is because he violated the states law. He was fined $500 and spent two years in jail.
McCollum vs Board of Education:
1)In 1940, Roman Catholic, Protestant, and Jewish formed the Champaign Board of Education which provided voluntary classes in religion to public school students.
2)By a 6-1 vote the Supreme Court, they invalidated the ability to have religious education during the school day in public schools.
3)The final vote count was 6-1/
4)The court decided this because by using tax-established and supported public schools to teach religion to students, the government aided these groups in the movement of their beliefs.
Ashley McKenzie
Abington School District vs. Schmepp-1963
1.) The Students in The Abington School District were asked to repeat a verse from the Holy Bible as it was being said over the loudspeaker every morning. Their parents were also notified and told that their child could participate in this event or leave the room while it was happening.
2.) This action violated the first amendment.
3.) The final vote count was 8 votes for Schempp and 1 vote against.
4.) The reason for the courts decision was because you cant have a religion taught in a public school and tell people that they can either learn it or step out of the classroom at the time. In the first amendment, theres freedom and religion which wasnt being followed by the Abington School District which is why the court decided against it.
Engel v. Vitale:
This was a landmark United States Supreme Court case that determined that it is unconstitutional for state officials to compose an official school prayer and require its recitation in public schools.The case was brought by the families of public school students in New Hyde Park, New York who complained that the voluntary prayer to "Almighty God" contradicted their religious beliefs.The prayer in question was:
Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers and our country. Amen.
In an opinion delivered by Justice Hugo Black, the Court ruled that government-written prayers could not be required to be recited in public schools and was an unconstitutional violation of the Establishment Clause.
Post a Comment