Government Quiz
frank v. alaska (1979)
frank says that as apart of the funeral they must eat therefore hunt moose. at this time moose were in shortage. he won but actually lied. he already had moose.
wisconsin v yoder (1952)
free exercise of religion not violation of compulsory attendance laws; Amish children do not have to go to school until they are 16---they may stop after the 8th grade
Johnson v. Robinson
granted educational benefits for veterans who served on active duty but disqualified conscientious objectors who performed alternate civilian service
Belief-Action Distinction and Valid Secular Policy Test
The Court, like Jeferson believed, has never taken a literal approach to the Free Exercise Clause. Rejected an absolutist interpretation of the clause and sought to draw a distinction between the behavior it did and did not protect.
Murdock v. Pennsylvania (1943)
The preferred freedoms doctrine first appeared, signaling the Court's willingness to give closer scrutiny to civil liberties disputes and removed itself from disputes involving economic interests.
What are civil rights?
reserved for those positive acts of government that seek to make constitutional guarantees a reality for all people
Throughout the Constitution, the extent of governmental authority is ________ _________.
strictly limited
S.D. of Abington Township v. Schempp
Bible read over intercom, students could go in hall if they chose (connotations of trouble). Established 2 part test: 1) Secular purpose, 2) primary effect does not advance or inhibit religion. Court ruled against State to protect the impressionable youth.
Engel v. Vitale, 1962
Decision holding that state officials violated the 1st amend when they wrote a prayer to be recited by New York's schoolchildren
What is commercial speech?
speech for business purposes, usually advertising
Reynolds v. United States
Banned polygamy, distinguished between practices that are protected, religion cannot make an illegal action legal.
Rosenberger v. UVA
Christian based school newspaper denied student activity fee allocation b/c of a school policy that did not allow fees to be allocated to religious activities. Student activity fees should be used on a religion-neutral basis to a wide spectrum of student groups, otherwise school officials would have to extensively scrutinize all student speech to make sure there was no religious content
United States v. Ballard (1944)
Concerned the "I Am" movement. The Court ruled that you don't have to prove a religion, you only need to show how sincere you are in the beliefs you hold.
United States v. Seeger (1965)
Court considered whether individuals who were not members of an organized religion could obtain a military exemption on religious grounds. Seeger asserted that he opposed participation in the Vietnam War on the grounds that they violated his religious beliefs. However, he preferred to leave the question as to his belief in a Supreme being open rather than answer yes or no. The Court provided a standard for the test of belief: in relation to a supreme being is whether a given belief that is sincere and meaningful occupies a place in the life of its possessor parallel to the orthodox belief in God. In response to this ruling Congree removed the words in relation to a supreme being from the 1940 Universal Military Training and Service Act.
Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah (1993)
Court considered whether ordinances prohibiting animal slaughter for religious purposes violate the free exercise clause. The Court struck down the ordinances which said animals could not be killed in any ritual ceremony if not for the primary purpose of food consumption. Said that the city had violated the free exercise clause since the laws were definitely targeting the specific religious group.
Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe, 2000
Court held that the district's policy permitting student-led, student-initiated prayer at football games violates the Establishment Clause.
Wallace v. Jaffrey 1985
Did Alabama law allowing regular prayer services violate the First Amendment's Establishment Clause? Yes. The Court held that Alabama's passage of the prayer and meditation statute was not only a deviation from the state's duty to maintain absolute neutrality toward religion, but was an affirmative endorsement of religion.
Wisconsin v. Yoder 1972
Did Wisconsin's requirement that all parents send their children to school at least until age 16 violate the First Amendment by criminalizing the conduct of parents who refused to send their children to school for religious reasons? Yes, the Court held that individual's interests in the free exercise of religion under the First Amendment outweighed the State's interests in compelling school attendance beyond the eighth grade.
McGowan v. Maryland 1961
Do Maryland's blue laws violate the Free Exercise and Religious Establishment clauses of the First Amendment? No. The Court found that the blue laws did not violate the Free Exercise Clause because the employees allege only economic injury and not infringement on their own religious practices.
Welsh v. United States, 1970
Exemption from military service as a conscientious objector was denied. The Supreme Court concluded that those beliefs were not sufficiently "religious" to meet the terms and affirmed the conviction.
Reynolds v US, 1879
Federal anti-bigamy statute does not violate the First Amendment's Free Exercise Clause. Ruled that the government can punish criminals without regard to religious beliefs. Criminal acts cannot be protected by religion.
What guarantees in the Bill of Rights are covered by the 14th Amendment's Due Process Clause?
Freedom of speech & press
Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993
Goal was to bring back the Compelling Interest Test. The only exception for a burden by the government on a person's religious freedom is: 1. If it is in the compelling interest of the government 2. The least restrictive means of furthering that interest are used.
Goldman v. Weinberger (1986)
Goldman wore his yarmulke in and out of military uniform due to his religion requiring males to keep their heads covered at all times. A superior told him it violated Air Force Dree Code regulations. The Supreme Court denied him his right saying that the military is separate from civilian society. Justice Brennans dissent advised Congress to correct this wrong that did not allow Goldman to wear his religious attire. Congress passed legislation in 1987 allowing members of military to wear an item of religious apparel while in uniform as long as it is neat and conservative and does not interfere with the performance of duties.
Abington School District v. Schempp
Held that public schools could not require students to participate in reading the Bible
Chauduri v. TN
Hindu professor at TSU objected to the college's beginning of some events w/ a prayer. 6th Circuit ruled in favour of TSU but TSU changed the oral prayers to moments of silence b/c of backlash (The prayer was neutral, generic, and non-sectarian)
Cantwell v. Connecticut (1940)
Jehovah's WItnesses members Newton Cantwell and his sons arrested for soliciting contributions and giving out pamphlets door to door in a Catholic Connecticut neighborhood without a license to do so. Court had to address incorporation of the free exercise clause via the Fourteenth Amendment and if it was to be incorporated was the Connecticut solicitation license policy violated the Cantwell's rights. The Court held that state can't prohibit the religion from soliciting and can't require a religion to come to the state to practice their beliefs. APPLIED FIRST AMENDMENT FREE EXERCISE CLAUSE TO THE STATES.
Palko v. Connecticut (1937)
Justices adopted the doctrine of selective incorporation. Provided the Court with jurisdiction over a range of personal liberty disputes.
Unemployment Division (Oregon) v Smith, 1989
Native Americans wanted unemployment compensation after being fired for taking peyote as part of religious ceremonies, but they were denied. The Court ruled the state was allowed to deny them unemployment. Scalia rejected the Compelling Interest Test. Religious beliefs don't exempt someone from a law which applies to everyone. Justice Blackmun dissented.
Everson v. New Jersey (1947)
New Jersey school transportation case; marked the first time the Court used the Fourteenth Amendment to apply the religion clauses of the First Amendment at the state level; upheld state statute reasoning that it benefited parents, not church-affiliated schools.
Braunfeld v. Brown (1961)
One of the first cases showing the changes in the Court's free exercise jurisprudence. Dealt with Jews having to close on Sundays when they could also not be open Saturday because it was the Jewish Sabbath. For economic reasons he needed to be open six days a week. The Court upheld the blue laws but veered from the established precedents and adopted the least restrictive means approach
hobbie v unemployment appeals (1957)
Paula Hobbie worked for Lawton and Company, a Florida jewelry shop. She joined the Seventh-day Adventist Church and informed her employer that she could not work from sundown on Friday to sundown on Saturday since it was her new church's Sabbath day. Lawton soon dismissed her for refusing to work Friday evening and Saturday shifts. Hobbie filed for unemployment compensation with the Florida Department of Labor and Employment Security. Lawton objected to paying benefits, claiming that she did qualify since she had been dismissed "for misconduct connected with her work." The Bureau of Unemployment Compensation agreed and denied her benefits. Hobbie claimed that this violated the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment. She unsuccessfully appealed the decision in the Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal Conclusion Decision: 8 votes for Hobbie, 1 vote(s) against Legal provision: Free Exercise of Religion
Lee v. Weisman (1992)
Prayers at public school graduation ceremonies violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
Cantwell v. Connecticut, 1940
Religious speech is protected, even from door to door, and cannot be regulated, as it would violate the 1st and 14th amendments
Wallace v. Jaffree
Ruled that Alabama law authorizing teachers to conduct religious prayer sessions during the school day violated the Establishment clause
Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe
School prayer at high school football games in Texas unconstitutional b/c it is an endorsement of religion by being authorized by a gov't policy and took place on gov't property at a gov't-sponsored, school-related event, coercion existed (some students had to attend: players, cheerleaders, band members, and there is peer pressure to attend the games within a community), and b/c it did not have a secular purpose (Lemon 1st prong)
Thomas v. Review Board of Indiana Employment Security Division (1981)
Similar to Sherbert case facts. Court reversed the state's denial of Thomas' unemployment benefits saying that unless the Court is prepared to overrule Sherbert, Thomas cannot be denied the benefits due him.
Reynolds v. United States (1879)
The Mormon Curch adherents lived mostly in the Utah Territory, the Court felt the need to consider whether this was even a religion at all.
McCollum v. Board of Education (1948)
The Supreme Court held that the state could not permit religious instruction to take place in public school classrooms as it was deemed a violation of the establishment clause.
What do the guarantees of freedom of assembly and petition intend to protect?
They protect the rights of peaceful assembly and petition, not violent actions that will cause danger.
Lyng v. Northwest Indian Cemetery Protective Association, 1988
1988 - O'Connor - Gov't can use its own land as it sees fit; people do not get veto power to all govt action that may interfere w/ their religion
Sherbert v. Verner, 1963
7th day adventist disqualified from unemployment benefits after declining a job that required work on Saturday (Sabbath)-- this was overturned because of free exercise-- strict scrutiny: need a really good reason to limit religion observance and belief
Pierce v. Society of Sisters (1925)
A 1922 Oregon State compulsory public school education act required children between ages 8 and 16 to attend public school. Ultimate effect was to force closure of the state's private schools, many of which were Roman Catholic. The society of sisters faced dissolution because it derived more than $30,000 of its annual income from its school. They sued the state arguing that the law deprived parents the fundamental liberty of determining how their children would be educated. The Court held for the Society of Sisters saying that the sisters engaged in a useful and meritorious undertaking.
United States v. Carolene Products (1938)
A 1923 law that prohibited the interstate shipment of milk blended with oil or fat. Justice Stone wrote for the Court, asserting that the justices would generally uphold such laws.
Everson v. United States 1947
A New Jersey law allowed reimbursements of money to parents who sent their children to school on buses operated by the public transportation system. Did the New Jersey statute violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment as made applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment? No, services like bussing and police and fire protection for parochial schools are "separate and so indisputably marked off from the religious function".
Hobby Lobby Case
ACA regulation requires for-profit companies to provide insurance for contraceptives. Hobby Lobby is a privately owned company and this is against their religion and argued using the RFRA
Sherbert v. Verner (1963)**
Adell Sherbert was forced to work on her Sabbath day, Saturday, after working 35 years in a textile mill. She did not comply and was fired. She was denied unemployment because her religious preferences were not a justifiable reason for not taking a job offered to her. Court ruled that citizens must not be foced to choose between religious beliefs or following governments impositions. Compensation for unemployed is a right, by saying its a privilege South Carolina was denying Sherbert her freedom of religion. *Created the COMPELLING INTEREST/LEAST RESTRICTIVE MEANS standard*
Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972)
Amish appellants argue against Wisconsin law requiring children to receive education through age 16. The amish children traditionally leave school after 8th grade. They held that compulsory education interferes with free exercise of religion and the children still receive homeschooling after 8th grade. The state argued that Amish children need to be in school because those who leave the faith need to not be ignorant when they enter normal society. Court ruled in favor of Yoder saying states interest was unbalanced and that the Amish have existed peacefully and maintained their religious practices and lifestyle for centuries. Justice Douglas dissented saying that it violates the childrens rights to an education by pulling them out.
Wisconsin v Yoder, 1973
Amish parents argued that schooling their children past 8th grade was contrary to their beliefs. They won the case, with SCOTUS declaring that the families interests in the free exercise of their religion outweighed the compelling interest of the state.
Christian Legal Society v. Martinez (2010)
Case Brief* Nondiscrimination policies are constitutional if they are viewpoint neutral and they do not violate free-speech or expressive-association rights.
City of Boerne v. Flores (1997)
Case Brief* Remained loyal to the Smith interpretation of the scope of government power to regulate religious exercise. Congress passed the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act affecting any zoning activity or prison facility that took federal financing. Religious exercise rights could not be restricted without a compelling reason using the least restrictive means.
Employment Division v. Smith (1990)
Case Brief* The Court rejects Sherbert test and now held that the free exercise clause does not relieve an individual from the obligation to comply with a valid and neutral law of general applicability on the ground that the law commands behavior inconsistent with a person's religious teaching. This basically reaffirmed the Reynolds doctrine and rejected the compelling interest approach.
1878 Reynolds v. US
Chief Justice: Morrison R. Waite George Reynolds, secretary to Mormon Church leader Brigham Young, challenged the federal anti-bigamy statute. Reynolds was convicted in a Utah territorial district court. His conviction was affirmed by the Utah territorial supreme court. Does the federal anti-bigamy statute violate the First Amendment's free exercise clause because plural marriage is part of religious practice? No. Chief Justice Morrison R. Waite, writing for a unanimous court, held that the statute can punish criminal activity without regard to religious belief. The First Amendment protected religious belief, but it did not protect religious practices that were judged to be criminal such as bigamy. Those who practice polygamy could no more be exempt from the law than those who may wish to practice human sacrifice as part of their religious belief.
1972 Wisconsin v. Yoder
Chief Justice: Warren E. Burger Jonas Yoder and Wallace Miller, both members of the Old Order Amish religion, and Adin Yutzy, a member of the Conservative Amish Mennonite Church, were prosecuted under a Wisconsin law that required all children to attend public schools until age 16. The three parents refused to send their children to such schools after the eighth grade, arguing that high school attendance was contrary to their religious beliefs. Did Wisconsin's requirement that all parents send their children to school at least until age 16 violate the First Amendment by criminalizing the conduct of parents who refused to send their children to school for religious reasons? Legal provision: Free Exercise of Religion In a unamimous decision, the Court held that individual's interests in the free exercise of religion under the First Amendment outweighed the State's interests in compelling school attendance beyond the eighth grade. In the majority opinion by Chief Justice Warren E. Burger, the Court found that the values and programs of secondary school were "in sharp conflict with the fundamental mode of life mandated by the Amish religion," and that an additional one or two years of high school would not produce the benefits of public education cited by Wisconsin to justify the law.Justice William O. Douglas filed a partial dissent but joined with the majority regarding Yoder.
1990 Employment Division of Oregon v. Smith
Chief Justice: William Rehnquist Alfred Smith and Galen Black worked at a private drug rehabilitation clinic. The clinic fired them because they used a hallucinogenic drug called peyote for religious purposes while worshipping at their Native American Church. The Oregon Employment Division denied them unemployment compensation because it deemed they were fired for work-related "misconduct." The Oregon Court of Appeals ruled that this violated their religious free exercise rights provided by the First Amendment. The Oregon Supreme Court reversed. Can a state deny unemployment benefits to a worker fired for using prohibited drugs for religious purposes? Legal provision: Free Exercise of Religion Undecided. Justice John Paul Stevens delivered the opinion for a 5-3 court. The Court instructed the Oregon Supreme Court to determine whether peyote usage for religious purposes is prohibited under Oregon law, or only by the employer. The Court required this information to consider the constitutionality of the denial of benefits.
Welsh v. United States (1970)
Court considered another section of the Military Training and Service Act of 1940. Statute excluded from exemption coverage individuals whose views were essentially political, sociological, or philosophical. The Court ruled that even if a draftee's objection to the war was not based strictly on traditional religious grounds, he could obtain a religious exemption if his moral and ethical beliefs were sincerely held. If those views are as strong as traditionally held religious beliefs, they take on a religious character falling with the protection of the law. *Conscientious objector cases --> Court moved away from the strictly theistic view of religion it had expressed in Reynolds.
Abington School District v Schemp (1963) [1]
Court ruled that public schools could not open the day with a bible reading. Pennsylvania law requiring public schools to open with bible reading struck down. ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE:RELIGION:1st
Pierce v. Society of Sisters 1925
Did the Compulsory Education Act violate the liberty of parents to direct the education of their children? Yes. The unanimous Court held that "the fundamental liberty upon which all governments in this Union repose excludes any general power of the State to standardize its children by forcing them to accept instruction from public teachers only."
Stone v. Graham 1980
Did the Kentucky statute requiring the ten commandments to be posted violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment? Yes, the Court ruled that the Kentucky law violated the first part of the test established in Lemon v. Kurtzman, and thus violated the Establishment Clause of the Constitution.
Zorach v. Clausen 1952
Did the New York "released time" program violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment? No. In a 6-to-3 decision, the Court held that the "released time" program neither constituted the establishment of religion nor interfered with the free exercise of religion.
Abington School District v. Schempp 1964
Did the Pennsylvania law and Abington's policy, requiring public school students to participate in classroom religious exercises, violate the religious freedom of students as protected by the First and Fourteenth Amendments? Yes, since the readings and recitations were essentially religious ceremonies and were "intended by the State to be so."
Lemon v. Kurtzman 1971
Did the Rhode Island and Pennsylvania statutes violate the First Amendment's Establishment Clause by making state financial aid available to "church- related educational institutions"? Yes articulated a three-part test for laws dealing with religious establishment. To be constitutional, a statute must have "a secular legislative purpose," it must have principal effects which neither advance nor inhibit religion, and it must not foster "an excessive government entanglement with religion."
Jacobson v. Massachusetts 1905
Did the mandatory vaccination law violate Jacobson's Fourteenth Amendment right to liberty? The Court held that the law was a legitimate exercise of the state's police power to protect the public health and safety of its citizens.
Cantwell v. Connecticut 1940
Did the solicitation statute or the "breach of the peace" ordinance violate the Cantwells' First Amendment free speech or free exercise rights? Yes. In a unanimous decision, the Court held that while general regulations on solicitation were legitimate, restrictions based on religious grounds were not. Because the statute allowed local officials to determine which causes were religious and which ones were not, it violated the First and Fourteenth Amendments.
McCollum v. Board of Education 1948
Did the use of the public school system for religious classes violate the First Amendment's Establishment Clause? Yes. The Court held that the use of tax-supported property for religious instruction and the close cooperation between the school authorities and the religious council violated the Establishment clause.
Marsh v. Chambers 1983
Does the chaplaincy practice of the Nebraska legislature violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment? No, because the chaplaincy practice had become "part of the fabric of our society." Did not use the Lemon test.
Reynolds v. United States 1879
Does the federal anti-bigamy statute violate the First Amendment's free exercise clause because plural marriage is part of religious practice? No, court held that the statute can punish criminal activity without regard to religious belief.
Engle v. Vitale 1962
Does the reading of a nondenominational prayer at the start of the school day violate the "establishment of religion" clause of the First Amendment? Yes. Neither the prayer's nondenominational character nor its voluntary character saves it from unconstitutionality. By providing the prayer, New York officially approved religion.
Burwell v Hobby Lobby, 2014
Hobby Lobby Inc. was a Christian company that did not want to provide the contraceptive health coverage that was required of them by the government to give to their employees. SCOTUS decided that Hobby Lobby was right because the government was creating a substantial burden that is not the least restrictive means of satisfying the government's interests. The Court allowed the HHS exemption that applied for non-profits to be applied to for-profits concerning contraception. Four justices dissented.
Lynch v. Donnelly, 1984
In Lynch v. Donnelly, the Supreme Court for the first time considered the constitutionality of government use or display of religious symbols. The Court held that a government-owned creche or nativity scene could constitutionally be displayed in a public area at Christmastime as an acknowledgement of the nation's religious traditions.
What does the Lemon Test evaluate? How did the test originate?
It decides whether a state law amounts to an "establishment" of religion. It stems from Lemon v. Kurtzman in 1971.
What does the 1st Amendment's Free Exercise Clause guarantee?
It guarantees to each person the right to believe whatever he or she chooses to believe in matters of religion.
What is the Establishment Clause? How does it provide for a separation of church and state?
It separates the church and state and guards against establishing a mandated religion. The clause separates the two in this country, but they aren't strangers or enemies to each other.
What is civil disobedience? Is it constitutionally protected? Why or why not?
It's a form of protest in which people deliberately but non-violentally violate the law, as a means of expressing their opposition to some particular law or public policy. It's not constitutionally protected because they're acts of opinions.
Minersville School District v. Gobitis (1940)
Jehovah's Witnesses refuse to recite Pledge of Allegiance and salute the flag because it violates a teaching from Exodus. State laws after WWI made flag salutes mandatory as a show of patriotism. Court ruled that the state has a legitimate secular reason for requiring flag salutes: to foster patriotism. The fact that it affected the Jehovah's Witnesses religious practice did not detract from its constitutionality. The ruling was condemned due to the mass violence against Jehovah's Witnesses following the decision since they were now perceived as being unpatriotic.
United States v. Lee (1982)
Lee was an amish man and carpentry shop owner. He refused to withhold social security taxes or pay employers' share of those taxes since Congress provided a social security tax exemption to self-employed Amish. He employed non-Amish workers. The Court made him pay since the burden on his religion was okay because compulsory participation is essential to accomplish an overriding governmental interest of maintaining the Social Security System.
Bob Jones University v. United States (1983)
May Government punish a sectarian institution for its religiously divined racist policy? The university prohbited interracial dating and marriage, to enforce this they excluded African Americans till 1971 when it began accepting married blacks only and 1976 to single blacks but only if they adhered strictly and accepted expulsion for interracial dating. The IRS revoked the schools tax-exempt status because its policies were racist. Court ruled against the school saying that this policy would n ot prevent Bob Jones from practicing its religion. It will inevitably impact the operation of private religious schools by denying their tax benefits, but their religious tenets will be upheld.
Sherbert v Verner, 1963
Sherbert refused to work on Saturdays on religious grounds and was fired. She did not receive unemployment compensation because she didn't take an available job. Violated the First and Fourteenth Amendments under the Free Exercise Clause. Gave birth to the "Compelling Interest Test" - The state must have a compelling interest in order to overturn the individuals free exercise rights.
employment division v. smith (1990)
States could deny unemployment benefits to a person fired for violating a state prohibition on the use of peyote even though the use of the drug was part of a religious ritual.
Zorach V. Clauson, 1952
Students had open campus and at lunchtime the church had bible study for students, court said that was fine
Marsh v. Chambers, 1983
Supreme Court of the United States held that government funding for chaplains was constitutional because of the "unique history" of the United States.
What does the 9th amendment state?
The American people possess rights that aren't set out in the Constitution.
Aguilar v. Felton (1985)
The Court applied the Lemon test to strike down a New York program that allowed state-supported remedial instruction of studentts in private schools. Considered the high watermark for separationist rulings
West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnette, 1943
The Court held that a compulsory flag salute violated the 1st amendment's exercise of religion clause and was, therefore, unconstitutional
Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 1925
The Court held that a state law in Oregon compelling all students to attend public schools was unconstitutional. It held it was purposely intended to eliminate private and PAROCHIAL schools.
West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette (1943)
The Court overruled Gobitis decision. Case was mainly based on freedom of speech grounds rather than on religious exercise.
Davis v. Beason (1890)
The Court reinforced Reynnolds decision. Permits regulations of religious practices if those practices interfere with the morals of the people.
Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah (1993)
The Court ruled that laws banning animal sacrifice were unconstitutional because they targeted the Santeria religion
Everson v. Board of Education, 1947
The Court ruled that the New Jersey law (allowing the state to pay for busing students to parochial shcools) was constitutional; the law benefited students rather than aided a religion directly.
Cutter v. Wilkinson (2005)
The Court upheld the RLUIPA laws requiring prisoners to have religious liberties inside federally assisted prisons.
Locke v. Davey
The court upheld a policy in Washington State excluding those who wish to study Theology from a publicly funded scholarship. The state simply could distribute the scholarship fund to whoever it wanted. Conclusion Decision: 7 votes for Locke, 2 vote(s) against Legal provision: Free Exercise of Religion
Equal Access Act of 1984
United States federal law passed to compel federally-funded secondary schools to provide equal access to extracurricular clubs including religious clubs.
Prince v. Massachusetts (1944)
Valid Secular Policy test applied in the area of child welfare. A Jehovah's witness allowed her nine year old niece to help her pass out pamhplets. This violated state law prohibiting minors from selling in public places any literature or articles of merchandise. Trial Court questioned whether the child had actually sold anything, at the Supreme Court it dealt with: Did the state law violate the First Amendment principles. A 5 to 4 holding that it did not. State legislatures can regulate religious practices that could harm children as well as those of questionable morality and safety. These laws are a reasonable use of state police power.
McGowan v. Maryland, 1961
a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that laws with religious origins are not unconstitutional if they have secular purpose
sherbert v verner (1963)
a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment required that government demonstrate a compelling government interest before denying unemployment compensation to someone who was fired because her job conflicted with her religion.
Employment Division v. Smith
case where respondents were fired from their jobs because they ingested peyote for sacramental purposes at a ceremony of the native american church; denied unemployment compensation because they were fired for "misconduct;" state held that ruling because an individual's religious beliefs do not excuse him/her from compliance with an otherwise valid law prohibiting conduct (such as the illegal drug peyote)
Bob Jones Univ. v. United States
held that IRS denial of tax exempt status to private schools that practice racial discrimination on the basis of sincerely held religious beliefs does not violate the Free Exercise clause because the government has a fundamental, overriding interest in eradicating racial discrimination
Sherbert v. Verner
held that South Carolina's denial of unemployment compensation benefits to a Sabbatarian, who refused to work on Saturdays because of sincerely held religious convictions, violated the free exercise clause
West Virginia State Bs. of Educ. v. Barnette
held that compelling a flag salute by public school children whose religious scruples forbade if violated the First Amendment
Gillette v. United States
held that the Free Exercise Clause does not forbid Congress from conscripting (enlisting) persons who oppose a particular war on grounds of conscience and religion
United States v. Lee
held that the Free Exercise clause does not require an exemption for members of the Old Order Amish from payment of social security taxes even though it is forbidden by the Amish faith
What is the process of incorporation?
including most of the guarantees in the Bill of Rights into the 14th amendment's due process clause
Wisconsin v. Yonder
invalidated a law compelling school attendance to age 16 as applied to Amish parents who refused on religious grounds to send their children to high school
The rights that the Constitution guarantees to citizens are ______.
limited
Cantwell v. Connecticut
reemphasized the distinction between religious opinion or belief, on one hand, and the action taken because of religion, on the other
Bowen v. Roy
rejected a challenge by two applicants to a federal statue that required the States to use SSN in administering certain welfare programs (applicants said the use of SSN would rob their rob the spirit of their daughter) because the Free exercise clause cannot be understood to require the government to conduct its own internal affairs in ways that comport with the religious beliefs of particular citizens
Lemon v. Kurtzman, 1971
struck down state program that would have helped pay the salaries of teachers hired by parochial schools to give instruction in secular subjects; states can allow parochial schools to use publicly funded textbooks if they are secular subjects and are standard but cannot use publicly funded teachers because they cannot be assured they will only teach secular subjects; failed 3rd part of Lemon Test
torasco v watkins (1961)
the Court held that Maryland could not require applicants for the public office to swear that they believe in the existence of God
County of Allegheny v. ACLU, 1989
the Court held that the seasonal display "endorsed Christian doctrine" and so violated the 1st and 14th Amendments.
Jimmy Swaggart Ministries v. Board of Equal.
unanimously held that the Free Exercise Clause does not prohibit imposing a sales and use tac on sale of religious materials by a religious organization; the burden is not constitutionally significant
Reynolds v. United States
upheld a federal law making polygamy illegal
Seditious Speech
- The Alien & Sedition Ats - The Sedition Act of 1917 - The Smith Act of 1940
What are the Constitutions Guarantees?
- it guarantees "the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Gov. for a redress of grievances" - the right to assemble or gather with one another to express views - the right to bring views to the attention of public officials
What does Freedom of Speech & Press not protect?
- libel - the false and malicious use of written words - slander - the false and malicious use of spoken words - obscenity - words that incite others to commit crimes
What are Freedom of Speech & Press meant to do?
- protect each person's right of free expression, whether spoken, written, or communicated in any other way - protect all persons' right to a complete discussion of social affairs
How does the government support churches and religion?
- tax exempt status - oaths taken in name of God - many meetings open with prayer - nation's anthem/ currency/ coins all include name of God
Lemon Test
- the purpose of the aid must be nonreligious - the aid can neither advance or inhibit religion - aid must not excessively entangle the gov with religion
Hosanna-Tabor
EEOC told Church it had to rehire a teacher. Court concluded that the teacher, as a call teacher, served as a minister and churches have the right under the free exercise clause to choose their own ministers. The establishment clause prevents the gov't from appointing ministers.
Pleasant Grove City v. Summum
Excluded a man from putting a religious monument in a park that had other religious monuments. Court said that these monuments were governmental speech and the gov't could decide which monuments to include in the park.
Zelman v. Simmons-Harris
Providing scholarships in Cleveland for students to attend Private Religious Schools. Passed 1st prong - educational purpose. Relied heavily on extra prongs: private choice and general applicability. PC - parent's chose w/ no extra incentive from the State, GA - not conferred on any religion generally
the 14th amendment's due process clause provides that...
no State can "deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law"
Engel v. Vitale
no test for school prayer. Said gov't can't compose prayers for any group of the American ppl to recite as part of a religious program carried out by the gov't
Town of Greece v. Galloway
prayers lead by audience, city has no input in the content, practice has gone on for a while
What are civil liberties?
protections against government; guarantees of the safety of persons opinions and property from arbitrary acts of the government
Board of Education v. Allen
public loans of secular textbooks to students attending private schools furthers education, not religion
Van Orden v. Perry
ignores Lemon Test and says it is supposed to serve as helpful signposts. 10 commandments monument in the Texas capitol park. Court said this was a passive monument b/c it does not confront people every day. Ten Commandments were an integral part of our Nation's heritage. 10 Commandments were religious, but Moses was also a lawgiver. Simply having religious content or promoting a message consistent w/ a religious doctrine does not run afoul of the Establishment Clause.
Bradfield v. Roberts
the purpose of a facility matters (even if it is run by religious people). Gov't can spend money on a hospital even if it is run by nuns
Private Property
the rights of assembly and petition do not give people a right to trespass on private property
Gitlow v. New York
year: 1925 issue: free speech and free press in the states decision: 1st amendment right of speech and press are among rights and liberties - now guaranteed in the states
What are the relationships between the Freedom of Speech & Press Amendments and the media?
-confidentiality - 30 states have passed shield laws to give reporters some protection against having to reveal their sources -motion pictures - the SC held that motion pictures were a business, not a form of expression -both radio & television are subject to more gov regulation than other forms of expression bc they're transmitted by "public airwaves"
The Lemon Test
1) Secular Purpose - The Statute must have a secular legislative purpose. 2) Primary Effect - The Statute's principal or primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion. 3) Excessive Entanglement - The Statute must not foster an excessive government entanglement with religion.
Establishment clause cases that involve religion and education.
1. Released time - students can be released during school hours to attend religious classes 2. Prayers and Bibles - prayer and bibles aren't allowed in or at school functions 3. Student Religious Groups - allowed to meet in school just like student organizations 4. Evolution - doctrines can't be prohibited on its relations to a religious belief 5. Aid to Parochial Schools - Supreme Court used Lemon test to determine what public funding of church-related schools is acceptable
States can NOT deny basic rights for what two reasons?
1. each state constitution has Bill of Rights 2. 14th amendment: due process clause
What are the 2 guarantees of Religious Freedom?
1. establishment clause - guards against establishing a mandated religion 2. free exercise clause - guards against the government interfering in the exercise of religion
Lemon v. Kurtzman
3 prong test. 1) Secular legislative purpose, 2) Primary effect cannot advance / inhibit religion, 3) No fostering of excessive gov't entanglement w/ religion. Court ruled against purchasing secular educational services for non-public schools (teacher's salaries, textbooks, etc...)
County of Allegheny v. ACLU
A nativity scene was placed on the grand staircase of the county courthouse, also, a Hanukkah menorah was placed outside of the City-County Building where the mayor and others have their offices. The nativity scene was unconstitutional b/c it stood alone in a place of particular prominence that provoked the thought that the county endorsed what the nativity scene represented. Christmas tree / menorah constitutional b/c there were two side by side religious symbols celebrated during the winter holiday period so there was no endorsement of a particular religious message.
Epperson v. Arkansas
Arkansas law banned evolution teachings from school. Clearly an advancement of religion regarding the beginning of life. Court said it was not generally applied so it was not neutral b/c it did not excise all discussion of the origin of man - attempted to blot out a particular theory b/c of its conflict with the Biblical account
Everson v. Board of Education (1947)
Case Brief* Applied the establishment clause to the states opening the door for challenges on establishment grounds. Also, it etched into law an interpretation of Madison's and Jefferson's philosophies that supports a clear division between government and religion. Decision stresses fundamental ideas, notably that the aid was secular in purpose(provide safe transportation to students), the aid was indirect(it was not paid directly to the religious institution), the beneficiaries of the aid were children(not churches). Provides indication of the sensitive and salient nature of religious establishment clauses. Catholic church blasted the Court for misconstruing Jefferson's position on church and state which the founders viewed the First Amendment to mean only that the Federal government may not prefer one religion over another. Indicates the divisive and complex nature of establishment questions. All justices agreed on the intent of the framers preference of a strict separation of church and state. However, they applied that historical fact to reach completely different conclusions about the reimbursement plan.
Edwards v. Aguillard (1987)
Case Brief* Court applied Lemon test saying that the law lacked a secular purpose but that its purpose was to endorse a particular religious view. Scalia's first argument that the Lemon test should be discarded and a standard should be developed to bring calrity and predictability to establishment clause jurisprudence. Criticized the First prong of the Lemon Test, the Purpose Prong saying it was indefensible.
Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971)
Case Brief* Court defined the constitutional line that government aid programs could not cross. Had a separationist approach unlike the accomodationist approach the results in Everson and Allen had reached on aid to public schools before.
Agostini v. Felton (1997)
Case Brief* Court had to reexamine Aguilar decision and applied the Lemon test in a new way. Justices used a more accomodationist view of what constitutes an impermissible advancement of religion and were no longer totally opposed to direct funding that supports educational functioning of private schools.
Arizona Christian School Tuition Organization v. Winn (2011)
Case Brief* Court held that tax credits for contributions to STOs was a private choice of citizens and not unconstitutional becase the money never came into government hands. Taxpayers only have standing when money is taken from them, placed in government tax revenues, and given by the government to organizations which the taxpayer objects to and violates the establishment clause.
Van Orden v. Perry (2005)
Case Brief* Court recognized the Ten Commandments as a historical image that represents our history, heritage, and the influence the commandments had on our nation. Decided on the same day as similar case, McCreary County, Kentucky v. American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky (2005). This case was decided with a different outcome. If the commandments are represented with other legal and historical representations, its constitutional. If it is represented in government property as a strictly religious representation, it is unconstitutional.
Zelman v. Simmons-Harris (2002)
Case Brief* Ignored the Lemon test and stressed instead that the CLeveland voucher program was neutral with respect to religion. Aid was equally offered to all students of public and private schools, religious and nonreligious. The government funds were spent the way they were as a result of the genuine and independent choices of private individuals. The program did not provide incentives that skewed those choices toward religious schools.
Lee v. Weisman (1992)
Case Brief* Ruled against graduation invocations and benedictions. The majority declined to revisit Lemon on the ground that previous cases on school prayer established clear precedent. Applied a coercion standard that Engel and Abington had recognized saying that prayer exercises in public schools carry a particular risk of indirect coercion. Scalia's harsh dissent presumed that the Lemon Test had been buried by this test and this was the only positive outcome of this decision.
School District of Abington Township v. Schempp (1963)
Case Brief* Upheld Engel decision and set firmly the principle that state-sponsored prayers in public schools violates the establishment clause. Set up a two-pronged test as a standard of law that paved the way for the Lemon Test:.
1963 School District of Abington Township, Pennsylvania v. Schempp
Chief Justice: Earl Warren The Abington case concerns Bible-reading in Pennsylvania public schools. At the beginning of the school day, students who attended public schools in the state of Pennsylvania were required to read at least ten verses from the Bible. After completing these readings, school authorities required all Abington Township students to recite the Lord's Prayer. Students could be excluded from these exercises by a written note from their parents to the school. In a related case -- Murray v. Curlett -- a Baltimore statute required Bible-reading or the recitation of the Lord's Prayer at open exercises in public schools. Murray and his mother, professed atheists -- challenged the prayer requirement. Did the Pennsylvania law and Abington's policy, requiring public school students to participate in classroom religious exercises, violate the religious freedom of students as protected by the First and Fourteenth Amendments? Legal provision: Establishment of Religion The Court found such a violation. The required activities encroached on both the Free Exercise Clause and the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment since the readings and recitations were essentially religious ceremonies and were "intended by the State to be so." Furthermore, argued Justice Clark, the ability of a parent to excuse a child from these ceremonies by a written note was irrelevant since it did not prevent the school's actions from violating the Establishment Clause.
1962 Engel v. Vitale
Chief Justice: Earl Warren The Board of Regents for the State of New York authorized a short, voluntary prayer for recitation at the start of each school day. This was an attempt to defuse the politically potent issue by taking it out of the hands of local communities. The blandest of invocations read as follows: "Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and beg Thy blessings upon us, our teachers, and our country." Does the reading of a nondenominational prayer at the start of the school day violate the "establishment of religion" clause of the First Amendment? Legal provision: Establishment of Religion Yes. Neither the prayer's nondenominational character nor its voluntary character saves it from unconstitutionality. By providing the prayer, New York officially approved religion. This was the first in a series of cases in which the Court used the establishment clause to eliminate religious activities of all sorts, which had traditionally been a part of public ceremonies. Despite the passage of time, the decision is still unpopular with a majority of Americans.
1971 Lemon v. Kurtzman
Chief Justice: Warren E. Burger This case was heard concurrently with two others, Earley v. DiCenso (1971) and Robinson v. DiCenso (1971). The cases involved controversies over laws in Pennsylvania and Rhode Island. In Pennsylvania, a statute provided financial support for teacher salaries, textbooks, and instructional materials for secular subjects to non-public schools. The Rhode Island statute provided direct supplemental salary payments to teachers in non-public elementary schools. Each statute made aid available to "church-related educational institutions." Did the Rhode Island and Pennsylvania statutes violate the First Amendment's Establishment Clause by making state financial aid available to "church- related educational institutions"? Legal provision: Establishment of Religion Yes. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice Burger articulated a three-part test for laws dealing with religious establishment. To be constitutional, a statute must have "a secular legislative purpose," it must have principal effects which neither advance nor inhibit religion, and it must not foster "an excessive government entanglement with religion." The Court found that the subsidization of parochial schools furthered a process of religious inculcation, and that the "continuing state surveillance" necessary to enforce the specific provisions of the laws would inevitably entangle the state in religious affairs. The Court also noted the presence of an unhealthy "divisive political potential" concerning legislation which appropriates support to religious schools.
2002 Zelman v. Simmons-Harris
Chief Justice: William Rehnquist Ohio's Pilot Project Scholarship Program provides tuition aid in the form of vouchers for certain students in the Cleveland City School District to attend participating public or private schools of their parent's choosing. Both religious and nonreligious schools in the district may participate. Tuition aid is distributed to parents according to financial need, and where the aid is spent depends solely upon where parents choose to enroll their children. In the 1999-2000 school year 82 percent of the participating private schools had a religious affiliation and 96 percent of the students participating in the scholarship program were enrolled in religiously affiliated schools. Sixty percent of the students were from families at or below the poverty line. A group of Ohio taxpayers sought to enjoin the program on the ground that it violated the Establishment Clause. The District Court granted them summary judgment, and the Court of Appeals affirmed. Does Ohio's school voucher program violate the Establishment Clause? Legal provision: Establishment of Religion No. In a 5-4 opinion delivered by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, the Court held that the program does not violate the Establishment Clause. The Court reasoned that, because Ohio's program is part of Ohio's general undertaking to provide educational opportunities to children, government aid reaches religious institutions only by way of the deliberate choices of numerous individual recipients and the incidental advancement of a religious mission, or any perceived endorsement, is reasonably attributable to the individual aid recipients not the government. Chief Justice Rehnquist wrote that the "Ohio program is entirely neutral with respect to religion. It provides benefits directly to a wide spectrum of individuals, defined only by financial need and residence in a particular school district. It permits such individuals to exercise genuine choice among options public and private, secular and religious. The program is therefore a program of true private choice."
2004 Van Orden v. Perry
Chief Justice: William Rehnquist Thomas Van Orden sued Texas in federal district court, arguing a Ten Commandments monument on the grounds of the state capitol building represented an unconstitutional government endorsement of religion. Orden argued this violated the First Amendment's establishment clause, which prohibits the government from passing laws "respecting an establishment of religion." The district court and the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against Orden and said the monument served a valid secular purpose and would not appear to a reasonable observer to represent a government endorsement of religion. Does a Ten Commandments monument on the grounds of a state capitol building violate the First Amendment's establishment clause, which barred the government from passing laws "respecting an establishment of religion?" Legal provision: Establishment of Religion No. In 5-4 decision, and in a four-justice opinion delivered by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, the Court held that the establishment clause did not bar the monument on the grounds of Texas' state capitol building. The plurality deemed the Texas monument part of the nation's tradition of recognizing the Ten Commandments' historical meaning. Though the Commandments are religious, the plurality argued, "simply having religious content or promoting a message consistent with a religious doctrine does not run afoul of the establishment clause."
Lynch v. Donnelly
City bought a nativity scene in 1970's and spent about $20 annually to set it up / take it down. Expenditures a violation of the Establishment Clause? No. The nativity scene was only a part of the larger holiday display that depicted American traditions during the winter holiday season. Christmas has been accepted as a national, non-sectarian celebration, rather than a religious holiday. Applied the Lemon Test.
Compare and Contrast civil liberties and civil rights.
Civil liberties are protections against the government and civil rights are associated with positive acts of the government.
Engel v. Vitale (1962)
Concerned with prayer in schools. Separationist decision on the New York requirement that teachers lead public school children in a prayer writted by the state's board of regents every morning.
Engel v Vitale (1962) [1]
Court OUTLAWED use of PRAYER in schools, even when VOLUNTARY. Court ruled that New York could not require a prayer at the beginning of the school day, as it violated ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE: RELIGION: 1st
Zorach v Clauson (1952)
Court allowed for "released time" for religious instruction that was held off school property
Walz v. Tax Commission of the City of NY
Court upheld property tax exemptions for religious organizations. Exemptions free the gov't from excessive entanglement. Does not have a purpose advancing / inhibiting religion - certain entities exist in the community to foster moral or mental improvement and should not be inhibited by property taxes. Created excessive entanglement prong.
Everson v Board of Education (1947) [1]
Court upheld the use of PUBLIC FUNDS for the operation of BUSES carrying students to PAROCHIAL SCHOOLS in New Jersey. INCORPORATED first amendment's ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE: RELIGION:1st
Wallace v. Jaffree
Court used Lemon test to strike down AL law that created a moment of silence in all public schools "for meditation or voluntary prayer," by saying that the primary purpose was not secular
Zelman v Simmons-Hans (2002) [1]
Govt program provides TUITION VOUCHER AID for schoolchildren to attend a participating public or private school of their parent's choosing is UPHELD. Does not violate establishment clause because assistance goes "to a wide spectrum of individuals, defined only by financial need and residence in a particular school district." ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE: 1st
Neutrality
If the aid is allocated on the basis of secular criteria neither favoring nor disfavoring religion and is made available to both religious and public schools on a nondiscriminatory basis, then the program is neutral in nature and likely to be constitutionally valid.
Chandler v. James
Injunction to stop all prayer in school. Court said that you wouldn't know if students were just being silent or praying. 11th Circuit said voluntary prayer in school day is permissible if: 1) prayer must be genuinely student initiated, 2) prayer cannot be a product of school policy / suggestion. In this case the prayer was student led.
Edwards v. Aguillard
LA law said if you teach evolution you must also teach creationism. Fails prong 1 of Lemon b/c the purpose of the law was to advance the religious viewpoint that a supernatural being created humankind. Not generally applied.
Lemon v Kurtsman (1971) [1]
LEMON TEST: program does not violate constitution if: 1. It has a primarily SECULAR purpose 2. its effect neither AIDS nor INHIBITS religion 3. does not EXCESSIVELY ENTANGLE GOV'T & RELIGION Court struck down Pennsylvania law reimbursing religious schools for textooks & teacher salaries ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE:RELIGION:1st
What is the difference between libel and slander?
Libel - the false and malicious use of printed words Slander - the false and malicious use of spoken words.
Lee v. Weisman
Rehnquist Court's first prayer case. Minister delivered an invocation and benediction at a middle school graduation (previously the school had invited a Rabbi). Court decided to keep the Lemon test but ignores it and focuses on coercion and the fact that the principle was involved in drafting the sectarian prayer (see Engel). There is coercion because peer pressure is involved so the court strikes down the practice.
Agostini v. Felton
Remedial programs for students, some in private schools. B/c of Aguilar, teachers taught in a van outside of the school in a public area. Court said that public employees in religious schools are not presumed to inculcate religion, there is no symbolic union of church / state, and does not finance religious indoctrination. Breaks Lemon test down into 2 prongs - folds prong 3 into prong 2
Why does the government restrict seditious speech?
Sedition is the crime of attempting to overthrow the gov by force or to disrupt its lawful activities by violent acts. The gov didn't want to be overthrown, so they restricted it.
Mitchell v. Helms (2000)
Solidified the position held in Agostini and the modified interpretation of the Lemon test. Held that advancement of religion occurs: 1) If any religious indoctrination is attributable to the government aid 2) If the aid program defines its recipients with reference to religion 3) If the aid creates an excessive government entanglement with religion.
Bradfield v. Roberts (1899)
Start of establishment clause jurisprudence. Involved appropriation for a hospital in Washington D.C. to treat indigent patients. Challenged because the hospital was to be operated by Roman Catholic nuns. The Court rejected the challenge finding it irrelevant that it was to be operated by Catholic nuns. The facilities purpose was what mattered and the Court held that the hospital had a secular, not religious, purpose. Showed from the start the Court's willingness to allow some public money to go to religious institutions if the aid was intended to advance a clear secular purpose.
Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971)
State laws allowing payment to parochial school teachers violate the First Amendment separation of church and state; created a test for future cases
Epperson v Arkansas (1968)
The Court struck down a state banning the teaching of evolution as the law violated the First Amendment separation of church and state.
Engel v. Vitale (1962)
The Supreme Court declared that the creation of an official state prayer was unconstitutional.
What is the process of incorporation?
The Supreme Court had to define the rights of the due process clause case by case.
Wallace v. Jaffree (1985)
The Supreme Court struck down the Alabama "moment of silence" statute.
What's the Bill of Rights and why did its omission from the original Constitution raise such an outcry?
The first 10 amendments in the Constitution that guarantee personal freedoms. Anti-federalists didn't like the lack of Bill of Rights and they wouldn't ratify the constitution if they weren't added which resulted in an outcry.
Everson v. Board of Education
Ultimate benefactors are children. Incorporated the establishment clause. Strict reading of Establishment Clause to find the statute constitutional
Limits of the Free Exercise Clause
actions that violate social duties or disrupt social order aren't covered under this clause (bigamy, using poisonous snakes during religious ceremonies, and refusal to vaccinate schoolchildren)
Lamb's Chapel
after hours use of public school rooms for religious purposes is okay (if you let secular groups use them you must let religious groups use them)
Tilton v. Richardson
building grants can be given to religious universities if the buildings are for a sectarian purpose (can use it for religious purposes after 20 years)
Separation of Church and State
church and government are constitutionally separated form one another but they aren't enemies or strangers
Marsh v. Chambers
did not apply the lemon test to uphold a NB legislature hiring a minister to say a public prayer before each daily session. Court rested on original intent of the historical nature of this practice
What is symbolic speech?
expression by conduct (picketing)
Jones v. Hamilton County
lemon test doesn't apply in cases involving legislative prayer (pray before legislation sessions). Policy allowed a prayer invocation to open legislative meetings by a private citizen. Policy allows any bonafide religious organization to participate and is thus neutral
What do the Constitution's guarantees only apply to?
the National government not the governments of the States (from Barron v. Baltimore)
What are the Bill of Rights?
the first 10 amendments added to the Constitution
What are the Time-Place-Manner Regulations?
the gov can make and enforce rules regarding the time, place, and manner of assemblies
Prior restraint
the gov cannot curb ideas before they're expressed; it can punish them after expressed
Freedom of Association
the guarantees of freedom of assembly and petition include a right of association (the right to associate with others to promote causes)