Mitchell v. Helms case brief summary
530 U.S. 793 (2000)
Before the court by writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit was the decision that Chapter 2 of the Education Consolidation and Improvement Act of 1981, 20 U.S.C.S. §§ 7301-7373, violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, U.S. Constitutional amend I.
CASE FACTS
By writ of certiorari, the court addressed whether Chapter 2 of the Education Consolidation and Improvement Act of 1981, 20 U.S.C.S. §§ 7301-7373 (Chapter 2), which provides government aid in materials and equipment to public and private schools, was a law respecting an establishment of religion.
DISCUSSION
Judgment reversed because law providing government aid to both public and private schools was not unconstitutional when law, that did not result in religious indoctrination by the government nor defined its recipients by reference to religion, did not advance religion in violation of establishment clause.
Suggested Study Aids and Books
530 U.S. 793 (2000)
Before the court by writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit was the decision that Chapter 2 of the Education Consolidation and Improvement Act of 1981, 20 U.S.C.S. §§ 7301-7373, violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, U.S. Constitutional amend I.
CASE FACTS
By writ of certiorari, the court addressed whether Chapter 2 of the Education Consolidation and Improvement Act of 1981, 20 U.S.C.S. §§ 7301-7373 (Chapter 2), which provides government aid in materials and equipment to public and private schools, was a law respecting an establishment of religion.
DISCUSSION
- In reversing the lower court's decision, the court held that Chapter 2 was not such a law because it neither resulted in religious indoctrination by the government, because the law determined eligibility neutrally, allocated aid based on private choices, and did not provide aid that had an impermissible content, nor defined its recipients by reference to religion.
- To the extent that Meek v. Pettenger, 421 U.S. 349, 44 L. Ed. 2d 217 (1975)and Wolman v. Walter, 433 U.S. 229, 53 L. Ed. 2d 714, (1977), conflicted with the holding, those cases were overruled.
- The plurality opinion rejected any distinction between direct and indirect aid and was concerned neither with the issue of divertibility nor whether the school receiving the aid was pervasively sectarian.
Judgment reversed because law providing government aid to both public and private schools was not unconstitutional when law, that did not result in religious indoctrination by the government nor defined its recipients by reference to religion, did not advance religion in violation of establishment clause.
Suggested Study Aids and Books
No comments:
Post a Comment