Religion

and Public
Schools
Norma Alejandro-Mattson
October 11th, 2016
 The First Amendment
Congress shall make no laws respecting
an establishment of religion or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or
abridging the freedom of speech, or the
press; or the right of people peaceably to
assemble and to
petition the government for a redress of
grievances.
 Key Clauses of the First
Amendment
Establishment Clause
Prohibits the state from
passing laws that aid a
religion or show preferences
of one religion over another
Free Exercise Clause
Prohibits the state from
interfering with
individual religious
freedoms

Public Schools are compelled as state agencies to

maintain a neutral position regarding religious matters
in their daily operations. They can neither aid or inhibit
religion.
Cantwell v. Connecticut , 310 U.S. 296 (1940)
Issue:
Jesse Cantwell, a Jehovahs Witnesses was
convicted on a charge breach of the peace for
playing a phonograph record sharply critical of
the Catholic religion to persons he encountered
on the street.

Rule:
A state may proscribe speech if it amounts to a
breach of the peace, which encompasses not
only violent acts, but also acts and words likely
to produce violence in others.
Cantwell v. Connecticut , 310 U.S. 296 (1940)
Analysis of facts:
His intent was to proselytize his listeners. Prior to his arrest,
there was no evidence that Cantwells deportment was noisy or
offensive. Moreover, although the message on the record was
offensive, it was only played to persons who voluntary agreed to
listen.
Did the arrest and conviction of Cantwell for violating the common law
offense of breach of the peace violate his constitutional rights of free
speech under the First Amendment of the Untied States Constitution?

Conclusion
The lower court is reversed
No evidence of assaultive behavior or threatening or bodily
harm, no truculent bearing, no profane, abusive, incident
remarks directed to the person of the hearer.
 Lemon v. Kurtzman
The establishment clause was intended to afford
protection against sponsorship, financial
support, and active involvement of the
sovereign in religious activity.
Over many years the Court has developed
criteria for analyzing a statues constitutionality
in regards to the establishment clause.
Total separation between church and state is not
possible, but the Court must determine whether
the government entanglement with religion is
excessive. To do this the Court has established
a three-part test called the Lemon Test.

Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602, 91 S.Ct. 2015, 29 L.Ed.2d 745 (1971)
Lemon Test

A statue must meet the following criteria

to be deemed constitutional:
must have a secular, legislative purpose
its principal or primary effect must be one
neither advances nor inhibits religion
must not foster an excessive government
entanglement with religion.
 Student
Religious
Expression
 Summary of the Rights of
Students to Express Their Faith
in a Public School
Maypray individually or in groups or discuss their religious
views with their peers as long as they are not disruptive

May read their Bibles or other scriptures, say grace before

meals, pray before tests, and discuss religion with other
willing student listeners

Inthe classroom, may pray quietly except when required

to be actively engaged in schools activities

In
informal settings, may pray either audibly or silently,
subject to the same rules or order as apply to other
speech in these locations
Students Do Not Have the
Right to
have a captive audience
listen to or compel
other students to
participate in their
expression of their
faith.
Prayer and
the Public
School
 School-Sponsored Prayer
TheU.S. Supreme Court first addressed
Prayer in schools in the landmark case
Engel v. Vitale.

Atissue was a short, voluntary prayer

the Board of Regents for the State of
New York authorized for recitation at the
start of each school day.

Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421 (1962)

 Engel v. Vitale
The invocation under scrutiny read as follows:
Almighty God, we acknowledge our
dependence upon Thee, and beg Thy blessings
upon us, our teachers, and our country.
The question put before the Court was, Does
the reading of a nondenominational
prayer at the start of the school day
violate the establishment of religion
clause of the First Amendment?

What do you think? YES or NO

Supreme Court Held
Neither
the prayers nondenominational
character nor its voluntary character saved it
from unconstitutionality.

By providing the prayer, New York was seen to

officially approve religion.

This was the first in a series of cases in which the

Court used the establishment clause to eliminate
religious activities of all sorts, which had
traditionally been a part of public ceremonies.
 Moments of Silence
In Wallace v. Jaffree, a case regarding a period of silence set
aside specifically for meditation or voluntary prayer, the
Supreme Court found the practice to be in violation of the First
Amendment.

There were three statutes examined in Wallace. One of these

authorized a 1-minute period of silence for meditation. The
Court did not find this statue to be unconstitutional.

The U.S. Dept. of ED., in its guidance to elementary and

secondary schools, states, If a school has a minute of
silence or others quiet periods during the school day,
students are free to pray silently, or not to pray, during these
periods of time. Teachers and other school employees may
neither encourage nor discourage students form praying
during such time periods.
Wallace v. Jaffree, 472 U.S. 38 (1985)
 Student Assemblies &
Extracurricular Events
The U.S. Supreme Court in Santa Fe Independent School
District v. Doe that the Districts policy permitting
student-led, student-initiated prayer at football
games violates the Establishment Clause.

The Court concluded that the football game prayers

were public speech authorized by a government
policy and taking place on government property at
government-sponsored school-related events and
that the Districts policy involved both perceived
and actual government endorsement of the
delivery of prayer at important school events.

Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe, 503 U.S. 290 (2000)

Interpretation of Santa
Fe
The Eleventh Circuit held that the
Supreme Courts decision in Santa Fe
did not prevent students from
discussing religion in public schools or
praying publicly, as long as such
activities are voluntary.
Lee v. Weisman 505 U.S. 577 (1992)
Issue:
Rachel Weisman (Defendant), alleges that a school
sponsored, non-denominational prayer offered at a
public school graduation violated the Religion Clauses of
the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.

Rule:
A public school cannot sponsor clerics to conduct even a
non-denominational prayer as a part of a graduation
ceremony as 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 state religion, or tends to do so.
Lee v. Weisman 505 U.S. 577 (1992)
Analysis of facts:
A rabbi was invited to deliver a prayer at a public schools
graduation ceremony. The rabbi was given a copy of a pamphlet
that recommended prayers at civic ceremonies be inclusive and
sensitive. The Defendant, a student at the school, challenged
the practice of having prayers at public school graduations.

Conclusion:
Affirmed
The principals act of giving the cleric guidelines for the prayer
means the principal directed and controlled the content of the
prayer in direct violation of the Establishment Clause of the
Constitution, which prohibits preferring one religion over
another. The government must not engage in religious
practices.
Religion
and the
Public
School
Curriculu
m
 Supreme Court
Holdings
Public schools may teach students about
the Bible as long as such teaching is
presented objectively as part of a
secular program of education.1
Religious groups may not teach religious
courses on school premises during the
school day.2
Any study of religion in a public school
must be educational, not devotional.
1
Abington Township School District v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203 (1963)
2
McCollum v. Board of Education, 333 U.S. 203 (1948)
 Administrative Guide
Theschools approach to religion is academic,
not devotional.

The school may strive for student awareness of

religions, but should not press for student
acceptance of any religion.

Theschool may sponsor study about religion,

but may not sponsor the practice of religion.

The school may expose students to a diversity of

religious views, but may not impose,
discourage, or encourage any particular view.
RELIGIOUS FREEDOMS INVOLVING
TEACHERS
Wearing of religious grab by teachers may be
disallowed if their dress creates a reverent
atmosphere or has a proselytizing impact on
students.
The religious rights of teachers must be respected
as long as they do not violate the Establishment
Clause of the First amendment by creating
excessive entanglement in the school
School officials must make reasonable
accommodations for teachers regarding observance
of special religious holidays, as long as such
accommodations are not deemed excessive or
disruptive to the educational process.
RELIGIOUS FREEDOMS INVOLVING
TEACHERS
Teachers should not be coerced to participate
in nonacademic ceremonies or activities that
violate their religious beliefs or convictions.
In cases involving the performance of their
nonacademic duties, teachers may be
requested to present documentable evidence
that a religious belief or right is violated.
No form of religious discrimination may be
used to influence decisions regarding
employment, promotion, salary increments,
transfers, demotions or dismissals.
Cruzan v. Minneapolis Public Sch. Sys.,
165 F. Supp 2d 964 (D.Minn. 2001)
Issue:
David Nielsen informed school administration that he
was transgendered. He would transition from male to
female and be known as Debra Davis in the
workplace. To plan for the transitions, the school
district collaborated with Davis, legal counsel, the
parent teacher association, students parents and
psychologists. Ms. Cruzan asked whether Davis would
be allowed to use the schools womens restrooms,
and administration informed her other arrangements
would be made. Later legal counsel informed the
school that under Minnesota Human Rights Act ,
Davis had the right to use womens restroom.
Cruzan filed a complaint with the Minnesota Department
of Human Rights, which dismissed Cruzans charge,
concluding there was no probable cause to believe an
unfair discriminatory practice had occurred. The
Department stated the Minnesota Human Rights Act
(MHRA) neither requires nor prohibits restroom
designation according to self-image of gender or
according to biological sex. After exhausting
administrative remedies, Cruzan field this action under
Title VII and the MHRA asserting claims of religious
discrimination and hostile work environment sex
discrimination.

Rule Religious Discrimination

To establish a claim of religious discrimination, Cruzan
must prove that:
1. she had a bona fide religious belief that conflicted
with an employment practice;
2. she informed the school district of her belief; and
3. she suffered an adverse employment action
Analysis of facts:
The district court concluded that assuming without deciding
Cruzan
had a bona fide religious belief that conflicted with the restroom
policy, she failed to inform the school district of her belief and did
not suffer an adverse employment action because of it.

Rule Gender Discrimination Hostile Work Environment

To establish a sexual harassment claim based on hostile work
environment, Cruzan had to show, among other things, that the
harassment affected a term, condition, or privilege of her
employment. The harassment must be so severe or pervasive
that it alters the conditions of employment and creates an
abusive working environment.
Analysis of facts:
The school districts policy was not directed at Cruzan and
Cruzan had convenient access to numerous restrooms other
than the one Davis used, Cruzan does not assert Davis
engaged in any inappropriate conduct other than merely
being present in the womens faculty restroom. Given the
totality of the circumstances, we conclude a reasonable
person would not have found the work environment hostile or
abusive.

Conclusion:
1. Defendants motion for summary judgment is
granted; and
2. Plaintiffs claims are dismissed with prejudice.
CASE STUDIES Group discussions
Religion and Student Expression
Jean Riley is the principal of a small elementary school in a
metropolitan school district . One of her best teachers asked her first-
graders to make a poster depicting things for which they were
thankful. One student made a poster expressing thanks for Jesus.
Posters were displayed in the schools hallway. The students poster
was removed but later returned in a less prominent place. The next
year, the student was chosen to read a story to the class. The student
selected an adaptation of a biblical story.

Discussion Questions
1. Should the student be permitted to read his biblical story? Why or why
not?
2. What is the legal issue surrounding both the poster and the biblical
story?
3. What legal risks does the school incur (if any) if it permits both of these
activities?
4. What legal risks does the school incur if denies both of these practices?
CASE STUDIES Group discussions
On the day of the Central Valley High School football
championship, the coach gave his team a last
minute pep talk in the Bulldogs locker room. He
then led the team in a prayer, as he traditionally did
before each athletic event. Richard Nelson, a
student, felt uncomfortable reciting the prayer
because he was an atheist. He mentioned his
discomfort to the coach who responded that Richard
should simply stand in silence or feel free to leave
the room while his teammates prayed together.
Discussion Question
1. Is the team prayer constitutional?
2. Is the coachs solution viable?
CASE STUDIES Group discussions
Teacher and Devotional Activities
You are a principal of a vibrant school located
in an industrial city of 300,000 people. It has
been reported that a group of your teachers
are holding devotional activities in the
teachers lounge during their break
Discussion Questions
1. How would you respond to this news?
2. Is it permissible for teachers to hold
devotional activities during school hours on
school premises? Why? Why not?
3. What action in any, would you take?
CASE STUDIES Group discussions
Fourth-grader asks teacher about her cross
necklace
Mrs. Carlson, a fourth grade teacher, wears a
small cross necklace visible to her students. One
of her students, Eric, notices the cross and asks
her what it symbolizes. Mrs. Carlson responds: I
wear it as a symbol that Jesus died for our sins.
Eric tells his parents that his teacher taught him
that Jesus died for his sins. Erics parents complain
to Mrs. Carlson.
Discussion Question
1. Was Mrs. Carlson correct to respond as she did?
Cantwell v. Connecticut
The initial intent of the First Amendment
prohibited Congress from making laws
supporting religion or prohibiting the rights of
individuals to exercise their religious rights.

The U.S. Supreme Court held in Cantwell that

this prohibition applied to the states as well.

The Fourteenth Amendment made the First

Amendment applicable to state guarantees to
citizens against state infringement of their
religious rights.

Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296 (1940)

 In the Beginning..
The Constitution as a whole made a virtually no
reference to religious liberties of United States
citizens when it was ratified by the states.

James Madison introduced a series of proposals

that included amendments aimed at preventing
encroachment by government into the rights
and liberties of all citizens. These proposals
eventually became.

THE BILL OF RIGHTS