Although the Constitution forbids public school officials from directing or favoring prayer in their official capacities, students and teachers do not "shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate. Students may also speak to, and attempt to persuade, their peers about religious topics just as they do with regard to political topics. Local school authorities possess substantial discretion to impose rules of order and pedagogical restrictions on student activities, [ 12 ] but they may not structure or administer such rules to discriminate against speech with a religious perspective.
Where schools permit student expression on the basis of genuinely content-neutral criteria, and students retain primary control over the content of their expression, the speech of students who choose to express themselves through religious means such as prayer is not attributable to the State and may not be restricted because of its religious content.
The Establishment Clause prohibits State officials from making judgments about what constitutes an appropriate prayer, and from favoring or disfavoring certain types of prayers—be they "nonsectarian" and "nonproselytizing" or the opposite. Students may pray when not engaged in school activities or instruction, subject to the same rules designed to prevent material disruption of the educational program that are applied to other privately initiated expressive activities.
Among other things, students may read their Bibles, Torahs, Korans, or other scriptures; say grace before meals; and pray or study religious materials with fellow students during recess, the lunch hour, or other non-instructional time to the same extent that they may engage in nonreligious activities. While school authorities may impose rules of order and pedagogical restrictions on student activities, they may not discriminate against student prayer or religious perspectives in applying such rules and restrictions.
Students may organize prayer groups, religious clubs, and "see you at the pole" gatherings before school to the same extent that students are permitted to organize other noncurricular student activities groups. Such groups must be given the same access to school facilities for assembling as is given to other noncurricular groups, without discrimination because of the religious perspective of their expression.
School authorities possess substantial discretion concerning whether to permit the use of school media for student advertising or announcements regarding noncurricular activities. However, where student groups that meet for nonreligious activities are permitted to advertise or announce their meetings—for example, by advertising in a student newspaper, making announcements on a student activities bulletin board or public address system, or handing out leaflets—school authorities may not discriminate against groups who meet to engage in religious expression such as prayer.
School authorities may disclaim sponsorship of noncurricular groups and events, provided they administer such disclaimers in a manner that neither favors nor disfavors groups that meet to engage in prayer or express religious perspectives. When acting in their official capacities as representatives of the State, teachers, school administrators, and other school employees are prohibited by the First Amendment from encouraging or discouraging prayer, and from actively participating in such activity with students.
Teachers, however, may take part in religious activities where the overall context makes clear that they are not participating in their official capacities. Teachers also may take part in religious activities such as prayer even during their workday at a time when it is permissible to engage in other private conduct such as making a personal telephone call.
Before school or during lunch, for example, teachers may meet with other teachers for prayer or Bible study to the same extent that they may engage in other conversation or nonreligious activities. Similarly, teachers may participate in their personal capacities in privately sponsored baccalaureate ceremonies or similar events.
If a school has a "moment of silence" or other quiet periods during the school day, students are free to pray silently, or not to pray, during these periods of time. Teachers and other school employees may neither require, encourage, nor discourage students from praying during such time periods. Schools have the discretion to dismiss students to off-premises religious instruction, provided that schools do not encourage or discourage participation in such instruction or penalize students for attending or not attending.
Similarly, schools may excuse students from class to remove a significant burden on their religious exercise, including prayer, where doing so would not impose material burdens on other students.
For example, it would be lawful for schools to excuse Muslim students from class to enable them to fulfill their religious obligations to pray during Ramadan. Students may express their beliefs about religion in homework, artwork, and other written and oral assignments free from discrimination based on the religious perspective of their submissions. Such home and classroom work should be judged by ordinary academic standards of substance and relevance and against other legitimate pedagogical concerns identified by the school.
Thus, if a teacher's assignment involves writing a poem, the work of a student who submits a poem in the form of a prayer for example, a psalm should be judged on the basis of academic standards such as literary quality and neither penalized nor rewarded on account of its religious perspective. Student speakers at student assemblies and noncurricular activities such as sporting events may not be selected on a basis that either favors or disfavors religious perspectives.
Where student speakers are selected on the basis of genuinely content-neutral, evenhanded criteria and retain primary control over the content of their expression, that expression is not attributable to the school and therefore may not be restricted because of its religious or anti-religious content, and may include prayer.
By contrast, where school officials determine or substantially control the content of what is expressed, such speech is attributable to the school and may not include prayer or other specifically religious or anti-religious content. To avoid any mistaken perception that a school endorses student speech that is not in fact attributable to the school, school officials may make appropriate, neutral disclaimers to clarify that such speech whether religious or nonreligious is the speaker's and not the school's speech.
School officials may not mandate or organize prayer at graduation or select speakers for such events in a manner that favors religious speech such as prayer.
Where students or other private graduation speakers are selected on the basis of genuinely content-neutral, evenhanded criteria and retain primary control over the content of their expression, however, that expression is not attributable to the school and therefore may not be restricted because of its religious or anti-religious content and may include prayer.
To avoid any mistaken perception that a school endorses student or other private speech that is not in fact attributable to the school, school officials may make appropriate, neutral disclaimers to clarify that such speech whether religious or nonreligious is the speaker's and not the school's speech. School officials may not mandate or organize religious ceremonies. However, if a school makes its facilities and related services available to other private groups, it must make its facilities and services available on the same terms to organizers of privately sponsored religious baccalaureate ceremonies.
In addition, a school may disclaim official endorsement of events sponsored by private groups, provided it does so in a manner that neither favors nor disfavors groups that meet to engage in prayer or religious speech.
Students have a right to distribute religious literature to their schoolmates on the same terms as they are permitted to distribute other literature that is unrelated to school curriculum or activities.
Schools may impose the same reasonable time, place, and manner or other constitutional restrictions on distribution of religious literature as they do on non-school literature generally, but they may not single out religious literature for special regulation. Public schools may not provide religious instruction, but they may teach about religion. For example, philosophical questions concerning religion, the history of religion, comparative religion, the Bible or other religious teachings as literature, and the role of religion in the history of the United States and other countries all are permissible public school subjects.
Similarly, it is permissible to consider religious influences on philosophy, art, music, literature, and social studies. Although public schools may teach about religious holidays, including their religious aspects, and may celebrate the secular aspects of holidays, schools may not observe holidays as religious events or promote such observance by students. Schools enjoy substantial discretion in adopting policies relating to student dress and school uniforms.
Schools, however, may not single out religious attire in general, or attire of a particular religion, for prohibition or regulation. If a school makes exceptions to the dress code for nonreligious reasons, it must also make exceptions for religious reasons, absent a compelling interest. Students may display religious messages on items of clothing to the same extent that they are permitted to display other comparable messages.
Lee advised him the prayers should be non-sectarian. Following the ceremony, which they did attend, they filed suit to stop this practice in the future. When the case reached the Supreme Court, the issue for the Court was whether including prayers, offered by clergy, as part of the official public school graduation ceremony was consistent with the religion clauses of the First Amendment. The opinion relied quite heavily on the argument that there are heightened concerns with protecting freedom of conscience from subtle coercion in the elementary and secondary public schools.
A reasonable dissenter of high school age could believe that standing or remaining silent signified personal participation in, or approval of, the group exercise, rather than respect for it. In the opinion, the Court acknowledged that if the affected citizens were mature adults, the choice to stand or remain seated during the prayers could be viewed differently.
The federal courts of appeal have upheld prayer at university graduations. The Supreme Court, however, has yet to rule on a case in higher education. In this photo, graduate Megan Hollar bows her head during a moment of prayer at Emory University's commencement ceremony Monday, May 9, in Atlanta.
In Santa Fe, a Mormon and a Catholic family together challenged the practice of the high school in Santa Fe, Texas, of having a student council chaplain deliver a prayer, described as overtly Christian, over the public address system before each home varsity football game.
The same year, in Chaudhuri v. State of Tennessee , the Sixth U. Circuit Court, the maturity of the students. This article was originally published in Mark Alcorn is a high school and college history instructor in Minnesota. The only type of prayer that is constitutionally permissible is private, voluntary student prayer that does not interfere with the school's educational mission. Students have the right to engage in voluntary individual prayer that is not coercive and does not substantially disrupt the school's educational mission and activities.
However, school officials must not promote or encourage a student's personal prayer. Students may engage with other students in religious activity during non-curricular periods as long as the activity is not coercive or disruptive. In addition, while students may speak about religious topics with their peers, school officials should intercede if such discussions become religious harassment.
It is essential that private religious activity not materially disrupt the school's educational mission and activities. Any school promotion or endorsement of a student's private religious activity is unconstitutional. Vocal denominational or nondenominational prayer, or ceremonial reading from the Bible, are unconstitutional practices in the public school classroom. Student volunteers may not offer prayers for recitation. The U. Supreme Court struck down a statute requiring a moment of silence which students could use for silent prayer or meditation because it was enacted for the purpose of advancing religion.
In those cases, the courts found that statutes in question and their legislative histories did not have a religious purpose or the effect of advancing religion. Furthermore, a moment of silence law or policy - regardless of whether its language and legislative history reflect a secular purpose and effect - will be unconstitutional if the statute is implemented in any way that encourages or discourages students to pray or engage in other religious activity.
A school district's policy of permitting student-led, student-initiated prayer before football games is unconstitutional. Prayers delivered by clergy at official public school graduation ceremonies are unconstitutional.
Supreme Court has not specifically ruled on whether student-initiated, graduation prayer is constitutional, and the lower Federal courts disagree on the issue. Doe that a district policy allowing student-initiated and student-led prayer before football games was unconstitutional, it effectively ruled-out the possibility that any district policy allowing student-initiated and student-led prayers would be permissible at graduation ceremonies.
Moreover, in both Santa Fe v. Doe and Lee v. Weisman , the Supreme Court expressed particular concern that students could be coerced, through pressure from their peers and others, into praying during school events such as football games and graduation ceremonies. This danger exists regardless of whether it is a member of the clergy or a student who offers the prayer. The Court also emphasized in Weisman and Santa Fe that attendance at major school events like graduation or football games should not be considered "voluntary" even if authorities officially designate it as such.
Weekly football games and high school graduation are central parts of student life and students should be able to attend these events without fear of religious coercion. However, baccalaureate services, which are distinct and separate from official graduation ceremonies, may constitutionally include prayers and religious sermons. Such events must be privately sponsored and must not be led or sponsored by school personnel. Any school endorsement of such events should be actively discouraged.
School officials, employees or outsiders must not offer prayers at school assemblies. Even if attendance is voluntary, students may not deliver prayers at school assemblies either. It is unconstitutional for teachers to pray with or in the presence of students in school or in their capacities as teachers or representatives of the school.
Indeed, teachers may have their free speech and free exercise rights to speak about religious matters and otherwise say prayers in the presence of students abridged in an effort to ensure that there is no appearance that the school is violating the Establishment Clause. Because teachers hold such a special status in the school and are viewed as government officials speaking to a group that is both a captive audience and extremely impressionable, religious speech by teachers or other school personnel will be seen as a state endorsement of religion.
The Supreme Court has upheld the right of legislative or deliberative bodies such as state legislatures to open their sessions with prayer. On the day of the Central Valley High School football championship, the coach gave his team a last- minute pep talk in the Bulldogs' locker room.
He then led the team in a prayer, as he traditionally did before each athletic event. Richard Nelson, a student, felt uncomfortable reciting the prayer because he was an atheist.
He mentioned his discomfort to the coach who responded that Richard should simply stand in silence or feel free to leave the room while his teammates prayed together. The team prayer led by Richard Nelson's coach is unconstitutional and the coach's offered solution is unacceptable. He has created an environment where Richard will feel isolated and as if he belonged to this group less than the other athletes.
Moreover, as a school official, the coach cannot endorse religion as he is doing here.
0コメント