Pls 517 Midterm, Spring 2015

Front 1

Establishment Clause

Back 1

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion…

Front 2

Free Exercise Clause

Back 2

...or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

Front 3

Private Choice Test

Back 3

For a voucher program to be constitutional it must meet all of the following criteria:
The program must have a valid secular purpose,
Aid must go to parents and not to the schools,
A broad class of beneficiaries must be covered,
The program must be neutral with respect to religion, And
there must be adequate nonreligious options.

Front 4

Lemon Test

Back 4

Details the requirements for legislation concerning religion. It consists of three prongs:
The government's action must have a secular legislative purpose; (Purpose Prong)
The government's action must not have the primary effect of either advancing or inhibiting religion; (Effect Prong)
The government's action must not result in an "excessive government entanglement" with religion. (Entanglement Prong)

Front 5

Sherbert Test

Back 5

consists of four criteria that are used to determine if an individual's right to religious free exercise has been violated by the government. The test is as follows:
For the individual, the court must determine
whether the person has a claim involving a sincere religious belief, and
whether the government action is a substantial burden on the person’s ability to act on that belief.
If these two elements are established, then the government must prove
that it is acting in furtherance of a "compelling state interest," and
that it has pursued that interest in the manner least restrictive, or least burdensome, to religion.

Front 6

Everson v. Board of Education

Back 6

The states were incorporated into the Establishment Clause; ALSO New Jersey law upheld (the reimbursements were "separate and so indisputably marked off from the religious function)

Front 7

Torasco v. Watkins

Back 7

State governments cannot require a religious test for public office.

Front 8

Engel v. Vitale

Back 8

Government-directed prayer in public schools violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, even if the prayer is denominationally neutral and students may remain silent or be excused from the classroom during its recitation.

Front 9

Lemon vs. Kurtzman

Back 9

For a law to be considered constitutional under the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, the law must have a legitimate secular PURPOSE, must not have the primary EFFECT of either advancing or inhibiting religion, and also must not result in an excessive ENTANGLEMENT of government and religion.

Front 10

Marsh v. Chambers

Back 10

The practice of hiring a chaplain for the Nebraska state legislature did not violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

Front 11

Lynch v. Donnelly

Back 11

The city of Pawtucket's nativity scene does not violate the Establishment Clause.

Front 12

County of Allegheny v. ACLU

Back 12

Display of the menorah in this setting was constitutional, while the Christian nativity scene in this particular setting was unconstitutional.

Front 13

Lee v. Weisman

Back 13

Including a clergy-led prayer within the events of a public high school graduation violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

Front 14

Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe

Back 14

The policy of the school district "permitting student-led, student-initiated prayer at [public high school] football games violates the Establishment Clause."

Front 15

Zelman v. Simmons-Harris

Back 15

The Court ruled that the Ohio program did not violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, because it passed a five-part test developed by the Court (Private Choice Test).

Front 16

Locke v. Davey

Back 16

The Court upheld the constitutionality of aWashington publicly funded scholarship program which excluded students pursuing a "degree in theology."

Front 17

Van Orden v. Perry

Back 17

A Ten Commandments monument erected on the grounds of the Texas State Capitol did not violate the Establishment Clause, because the monument, when considered in context, conveyed a historic and social meaning rather than an intrusive religious endorsement.

Front 18

McCreary County v. American Civil Liberties Union

Back 18

Displaying the Ten Commandments bespeaks a religious object unless they are integrated with a secular message. The government violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment in three ways: The first way was that they were displaying the Ten Commandments in isolation; the second for showing the Commandments along with other religious passages; the third for presenting the Commandments in a presentation of the "Foundations of American Law" exhibit.

Front 19

West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette

Back 19

The Free Speech clause of the First Amendment prohibits public schools from forcing students to salute the American flag and say the Pledge of Allegiance. District Court affirmed.

Front 20

Sherbert v. Verner

Back 20

The Free Exercise Clause mandates strict scrutiny for unemployment compensation claims. Established Sherbert Test

Front 21

Wisconsin v. Yoder

Back 21

The Wisconsin Compulsory School Attendance Law violated the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment because required attendance past the eighth grade interfered with the right of Amish parents to direct the religious upbringing of their children. Supreme Court of Wisconsin affirmed.

Front 22

United States v. Lee

Back 22

The tax imposed on employers to support theSocial Security System does not violate theFree Exercise Clause due to its need to be uniformly applicable and its accomplishment of an overriding governmental interest.

Front 23

Bob Jones University v. United States

Back 23

"Neither petitioner qualifies as a tax-exempt organization...[i]t would be wholly incompatible with the concepts underlying tax exemption to grant tax-exempt status to racially discriminatory private educational entities. Whatever may be the rationale for such private schools' policies, racial discrimination in education is contrary to public policy. Racially discriminatory educational institutions cannot be viewed as conferring a public benefit within the above 'charitable' concept or within the congressional intent underlying 501(c)(3)."[1]

Front 24

Bowen v. Roy

Back 24

The statutory requirement that a state agency utilize Social Security numbers in administering the programs in question does not violate the Free Exercise Clause. That Clause affords an individual protection from certain forms of governmental compulsion but does not afford an individual a right to dictate the conduct of the Government's internal procedures. The Government's use of a Social Security number for appellees' child does not itself impair appellees' freedom to exercise their religion.

Front 25

Goldman v. Weinberger

Back 25

The Free Exercise Clause does not protect religious apparel from military uniform regulations.

Front 26

Employment Division v. Smith

Back 26

The Free Exercise Clause permits the State to prohibit sacramental peyote use and thus to deny unemployment benefits to persons discharged for such use. Neutral laws of general applicability do not violate the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment.
Lemon in the public aid context
1. secular purpose
2. neutral effects
a. eligibility requirements
b. neutral incentives

Front 27

Church of the Lukumi Babaly Aye, Inc. v. City of Mialeah

Back 27

The states cannot restrict religiously-mandatedritual slaughter of animals, regardless of the purpose of the slaughter.

Front 28

City of Boerne v. Flores

Back 28

Enactment of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 exceeded congressional power under Sec. 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Front 29

Rosenberger v. University of Virginia

Back 29

The University's denying funds available to other student publications, but not to a publication produced from a religious viewpoint, violates the First Amendment's guarantee of free speech. The University's assertion that the exclusion was necessary to avoid violating the Establishment Clause lacked merit because the funds were apportioned neutrally to any group meeting certain criteria that requested the funds.

Front 30

Wallace v. Jaffree

Back 30

State endorsement of prayer activities in schools is prohibited by the First Amendment.

Front 31

Abington School District vs. Schempp

Back 31

Sanctioned and organized Bible reading in public schools in the United States is unconstitutional.