The Supreme Court Justices are tasked with making decisions that help shape society. Their court decisions provide rules and guidelines for future court cases by setting case precedent. Court rulings are based on interpretations of statutory laws that are created by legislative bodies like Congress or state government; however, when statutory laws are created, it is impossible to anticipate all situations or issues that may come about. When there is conflict, the court system is tasked with interpreting the statutory law when it is unclear. Once courts make a decision, the ruling then becomes a guide for future, similar cases. According to the doctrine of stare decisis, meaning
“stand by decided matters” in Latin, any future court case brought …show more content…
Their education rejects the concept of higher learning and focuses mainly on agriculture (Wisconsin v. Yoder Oral).
John Calhoun, attorney for Wisconsin, argued that the Amish children needed to learn about our government and our history so they could vote and become active citizens. Calhoun also stated that the Amish children had a right to choose whether to attend high school, but because their parents were making the decisions for them, the children were losing their chance of having a good education (Constitutional Rights
Clowdis 4
Foundation Chicago 4). In the opinion of Wisconsin, it is the parents’ right of religious freedom to bring up their children as they believe God dictates; but does not necessarily determine what actions are taken with regard to state statutes. Wisconsin also believed that the state’s interest in establishing and maintaining an educational system should override the defendant’s right to free exercise of his religion (Wisconsin v. Yoder Oral).
An additional argument was that if the children ever chose to leave the …show more content…
Supreme Court Justice E. Harold Hallows stated that “the right to worship your God or to practice your religious beliefs are as important as the right to speak or print freely and may, to the individual involved, be more important” (Famous
Cases of the Wisconsin Supreme Court 2).
The case was decided on May 15, 1972 by a vote of six to one in favor of Jonas
Yoder and the other Amish parents. The Supreme Court decided that state officials enforcing W isconsin’s compulsory high school attendance law for children of the members of the Conservative Amish Mennonite Church violated the parents’ rights
Clowdis 5 under the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment of the Constitution (Hall and
Ely Jr. 1).
I am undecided about how I feel about this case. In one aspect, I see the need for less governmental control over how families choose teach religion and how to raise their children. I understand and support the argument for freedom of choice and freedom of religion. Who’s to say that a simple way of living is not the best quality
“stand by decided matters” in Latin, any future court case brought …show more content…
Their education rejects the concept of higher learning and focuses mainly on agriculture (Wisconsin v. Yoder Oral).
John Calhoun, attorney for Wisconsin, argued that the Amish children needed to learn about our government and our history so they could vote and become active citizens. Calhoun also stated that the Amish children had a right to choose whether to attend high school, but because their parents were making the decisions for them, the children were losing their chance of having a good education (Constitutional Rights
Clowdis 4
Foundation Chicago 4). In the opinion of Wisconsin, it is the parents’ right of religious freedom to bring up their children as they believe God dictates; but does not necessarily determine what actions are taken with regard to state statutes. Wisconsin also believed that the state’s interest in establishing and maintaining an educational system should override the defendant’s right to free exercise of his religion (Wisconsin v. Yoder Oral).
An additional argument was that if the children ever chose to leave the …show more content…
Supreme Court Justice E. Harold Hallows stated that “the right to worship your God or to practice your religious beliefs are as important as the right to speak or print freely and may, to the individual involved, be more important” (Famous
Cases of the Wisconsin Supreme Court 2).
The case was decided on May 15, 1972 by a vote of six to one in favor of Jonas
Yoder and the other Amish parents. The Supreme Court decided that state officials enforcing W isconsin’s compulsory high school attendance law for children of the members of the Conservative Amish Mennonite Church violated the parents’ rights
Clowdis 5 under the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment of the Constitution (Hall and
Ely Jr. 1).
I am undecided about how I feel about this case. In one aspect, I see the need for less governmental control over how families choose teach religion and how to raise their children. I understand and support the argument for freedom of choice and freedom of religion. Who’s to say that a simple way of living is not the best quality