The Oyez Project Virtual Tour of the Supreme Court Building

Abstract

Oral Argument: Wednesday, March 3, 1971
Decision: Monday, June 28, 1971
Issues: First Amendment, Parochiaid
Categories: education, establishment of religion, first amendment, freedom of religion

Advocates

William B. Ball (Argued the cause for the appellee schools)
J. Shane Creamer (Argued the cause for the appellees)
Henry W. Sawyer, III (Argued the cause for the appellants)

Facts of the Case

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."

Question

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"?

Conclusion

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.

Supreme Court Justice Opinions and Votes (by Ideology)

Sort by Seniority
(More information here)
Full Opinion: First Amendment, Parochiaid: 8 - 0
Voted with the majority, authored a concurrence
Douglas
Voted with the majority, authored a special concurrence
Brennan
Did not participate
Marshall
Voted with the majority, joined Douglas' concurrence
Black
Voted with the majority, joined Burger's opinion
Harlan
Voted with the majority, joined Burger's opinion
Stewart
Voted with the majority, authored a special concurrence
White
Voted with the majority, joined Burger's opinion
Blackmun
Voted with the majority, authored an opinion
Burger
Full Opinion: First Amendment, Parochiaid: 8 - 1
Voted with the majority
Douglas
Voted with the majority
Brennan
Voted with the majority, authored a concurrence
Marshall
Voted with the majority
Black
Voted with the majority
Harlan
Voted with the majority
Stewart
Voted with the minority, authored a dissent
White
Voted with the majority
Blackmun
Voted with the majority
Burger

Cite this page

The Oyez Project, Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 (1971),
available at: <http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_89/>
(last visited ).