Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Zelman v. Simmons-Harris, 536 U.S. 639 (2002), was a 5–4 decision of the United States Supreme Court that upheld an Ohio program that used school vouchers.The Court decided that the program did not violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, as long as parents using the program were allowed to choose among a range of secular and religious schools.
The decision was the first to hold that the Establishment Clause was applicable against the states. It is also remembered as the first Supreme Court case to attempt an explanation of the Establishment Clause. [4] They held that the New Jersey law providing reimbursement to transportation to all students was not a violation of the establishment ...
American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio and The Rev. Matthew Peterson v. Capitol Square Review & Advisory Board; American Family Ass'n v. City and County of San Francisco; American Jewish Congress v. Bost; American Legion v. American Humanist Association; Arizona Christian School Tuition Organization v. Winn; Aronow v. United States
Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow, 542 U.S. 1 (2004), was a case decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. [1] The lawsuit, originally filed as Newdow v. United States Congress, Elk Grove Unified School District, et al. in 2000, led to a 2002 ruling by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit that the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance are an endorsement of ...
The Establishment Clause forbids the enactment of any law 'respecting an establishment of religion.' The Court has applied a three-pronged test to determine whether legislation comports with the Establishment Clause. First, the legislature must have adopted the law with a secular purpose.
Regulation of religious schools is restricted by the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment, while government support of religious schools is restricted by the Establishment Clause. The court ruled that school voucher systems are constitutional in the 2002 case Zelman v. Simmons-Harris. [45]
For decades the Supreme Court has entangled itself in establishment-clause decisions that have been, in the words of Alice in Wonderland, curiouser and curiouser. On Wednesday, it can leaven with ...
In an 8–1 decision, [1] the Court held that denying equal access to the religious club violated the Equal Access Act, and that treating a religious club equally, including providing a sponsor like other clubs, would not constitute an endorsement of religion prohibited by the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.