Facts of the Case
Chapter 2 of the Education Consolidation and Improvement Act of 1981 provides for the allocation of funds for educational materials and equipment, including library materials and computer software and hardware, to public and private elementary and secondary schools to implement "secular, neutral, and nonideological" programs. In Jefferson Parish, Louisiana, about 30% of Chapter 2 funds are allocated for private schools, most of which are Catholic or otherwise religiously affiliated. Mary Helms and other public school parents file suit alleging that Chapter 2, as applied in Jefferson Parish, violated the First Amendment's Establishment Clause. The District Court initially agreed, finding that Chapter 2 had the primary effect of advancing religion because the materials and equipment loaned to the Catholic schools were direct aid and that the schools were pervasively sectarian. However, after the presiding judge who made the initial ruling retired, the case was reviewed by a new judge, who reversed that decision. Thereafter, based on different precedent, the court upheld Chapter 2. In reversing, the Court of Appeals held Chapter 2 unconstitutional.
Questions
Does Chapter 2 of the Education Consolidation and Improvement Act of 1981 violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment?
Conclusions
-
No. In a 6-3 plurality decision delivered by Justice Clarence Thomas, the Court held that that Chapter 2, as applied in Jefferson Parish, is not a law respecting an establishment of religion simply because many of the private schools receiving Chapter 2 aid in the parish are religiously affiliated. Turning to neutrality to distinguish between indoctrination attributable to the State and that which is not, Justice Thomas wrote for the Court, "[i]f the religious, irreligious, and areligious are all alike eligible for governmental aid, no one would conclude that any indoctrination that any particular recipient conducts has been done at the behest of the government."
The Rise of the Undead Blaine Amendment
The Lemon test, a perennial ghoul of Establishment Clause jurisprudence, seems to have finally received...
The Ministerial Exception After Hosanna-Tabor: Firmly Founded, Increasingly Refined
Federalist Society Review, Volume 20
Note from the Editor: The Federalist Society takes no positions on particular legal and public...
Who Said That?: A Simple Question That May Change the Way Courts View Legislative Prayer
Engage Volume 14, Issue 1 February 2013
Related Opinions & Briefs: • Petition for Writ of Certiorari, Town of Greece v. Galloway:...
Does the Establishment Clause Require Broad Restrictions on Religious Expression As Recommended By President Obama’s Faith-Based Advisory Council?
New Federal Initiatives Project
Brought to you by the Religious Liberties Practice GroupThe Federalist Society takes no position on particular...
The Grand Finale is Just the Beginning: School Choice and the Coming Battle over Blaine Amendments
The oral arguments in the Cleveland school choice case, Zelman v. Simmons-Harris, held on February...