The Unfair Engel V. Vitale Court Case Study

The Unfair Engel v. Vitale Court Case Many court cases are viewed unfair by the public, and seem to violate the U.S. Constitution’s first amendment. A particular trial aroused my attention as well. I disagree with the Supreme Court’s decision in the Engel v. Vitale trial that declared it unconstitutional to openly lead prayer in public schools.
According to the Constitution’s first amendment, each U.S. citizen is entitled to religious freedom. In detail, this right establishes the freedom to worship a higher power in whatever manner is preferred. The Constitution also states that it will not make laws that interfere with the permissible practice of religion. This natural law was meant to balance equality between those of a religion and nonbelievers. …show more content…
I feel as though the court didn’t correctly uphold the first amendment’s right to religious freedom. Citizens should be able to conduct prayers to their gods freely. According to the Constitution, the right of religious freedom is protected by the government. However, the court’s verdict of Engel v. Vitale placed an unjust limitation on religious freedom. As stated in the case, the prayer was not mandatory. All students had an option as to whether they wanted to participate in it or not. Therefore, the prayer was not being forced upon the students. In my opinion, the school board’s prayer was within the guidelines of the Constitution. There was no reason to prohibit the practice of reciting the prayer. Those of that religion simply wanted to start their day with a prayer that incorporated the morals they believed were just. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court took away their freedom to pray publicly …show more content…
Vitale case. By leading a prayer, the school board was exercising their right to free speech. The Constitution grants us, as citizens, the right to speak freely over what we desire to discuss in a peaceful manner. Reciting a prayer is simply a way of speaking to a higher power. With words only, no physical harm was done to the students. If they were deeply rooted in their morals, simply hearing a prayer would not have much effect on what they believed. I believe that this court case placed a limitation on freedom of speech along with religious freedom. Both sides of the case were not viewed equally. Even though the new families were offended by the public prayer, in no way were their children threatened. They had the option not to participate, so the school board was respectful of the public. Therefore, the freedom of speech was not honored correctly in this case