Constitutional Law First Amendment Review

Lemon v. Kurtzman

Ruled that government funding of teachers' salaries is unconstitutional; funding for textbooks is allowed.

Stone v. Graham

Held that displaying the Ten Commandments in public schools is unconstitutional.

Everson v. Board of Education

Concluded that reimbursement of transportation costs for students attending private religious schools is constitutional.

Lee v. Weisman

Determined that inviting clergy to official public school ceremonies violates the Establishment Clause.

Board of Education Westside v. Mergens

Affirmed that students can form religious clubs within schools.

Locke v. Davey

Declared that state funding for education to become a minister is unconstitutional.

Wallace v. Jaffree

Ruled that optional prayer within schools is unconstitutional.

Engel v. Vitale

Held that non-denominational, voluntary prayer in schools is unconstitutional.

Trinity Lutheran v. Comer

Found that excluding churches from a neutral aid program violates the free exercise of religion.

Carson v. Makin

Ruled that disqualifying recipients solely based on their religious character is unconstitutional.

Sante Fe Independent v. Doe

Held that student-led, student-initiated prayer violates the Establishment Clause.

American Legion v. American Humanists Association

Religious Symbols with non-religious connotations are permitted

County of Alleghany v. ACLU

Not all religious celebrations funded by the government violate the establishment clause; Jewish menorah does not violate the EC, while the Christian Nativity Scene does violate the EC

Kennedy v. Bremerton

School officials can pray outside of school hours, and Kennedys decision to pray after games didn’t violate the First Amendmen

Endorsement/Neutrality Test

Does the government endorse religion, or is it neutral? Would a reasonable person see the government's action as endorsing religion?

Seeger Test

1. The beliefs must be sincere and meaningful, and have a similar significance in the person's life as a traditional religious being

2. The belief doesn’t need to come from a religious tradition, but can be a personal belief

3. The belief does not need to be theistic, or based on belief of a Supreme Being

Lemon Test

1. Does the statute have a secular purpose?

2. Could the primary effect be one that either promotes or inhibits religion?

3. Does the state provide for excessive government entanglement of religion?

Sherbert Test

If you have an infringement on religious conduct, the court must apply strict scrutiny. Government cannot infringe unless: 

• Compelling government interest

• Narrowly tailored

• Strict Scrutiny Applied

Smith Test

Used where a law incidentally (not on purpose) burdens religious practice

A law may burden religion if it is neutral and generally applicable, but if not, then the burden on religion must be justified by a compelling government interest. 

Only in cases involving two fundamental rights should strict scrutiny be applied to laws of general applicability

Difference between Sherbert and Smith

• Smith is for generally applicable laws and when religious burden is incidental, while Sherbert is for when there's infringement on religious conduct

• Sherbert has more scrutiny than Smith, unless two fundamental rights are violated in Smith

Free exercise analysis

1. Religious belief: absolute protection of free exercise 

2. Religious speech

3. Religious conduct

Free Exercise Clause: Religion should be free from government intrusion 

1. Religious belief

2. Protection of religious speech (Cantwell) 

3. Religious conduct (Sherbert, Yoder)