Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Lemon V Kurtzman (Digest)
Lemon V Kurtzman (Digest)
Facts:
Issue:
W/N The Rhode Islands statute and the Pennsylvanie statute are unconstitutional for violating the religious clause of
the First Amendment - YES
Held:
The Religion Clause of the First Ammendment commands that there should be “no law respecting an
establishment of religion.”
In the absence of precisely stated constitutional prohibitions, the court must draw lines with reference to the
three main evils against which the Establishment Clause was intended to afford protection: "sponsorship,
financial support, and active involvement of the sovereign in religious activity."
A statute must not foster "an excessive government entanglement with religion."
Both statutes are unconstitutional under the Religion Clauses of the First Amendment, as the cumulative
impact of the entire relationship arising under the statutes involves excessive entanglement between
government and religion.
Pennsylvania Statute
The entanglement in the Pennsylvania program arises from the restrictions and surveillance necessary to
ensure that teachers play a strictly nonideological role and the state supervision of nonpublic school
accounting procedures required to establish the cost of secular, as distinguished from religious, education.
Furthermore, the Pennsylvania statute has the further defect of providing continuing financial aid directly to
the church-related schools.
The government's post-audit power to inspect the financial records of church-related schools creates an
“intimate and continuing relationship” between church and state.
Political division along religious lines was one of the evils at which the First Amendment aimed.
These programs which are successive and have permanent annual appropriations benefit relatively few
religious groups. Therefore, political fragmentation and divisiveness on religious lines may be intensified.
Unlike in Walz v. Tax Commission which upheld the tax exemption for places of religious worship based on
a practice of 200 years, these innovative programs have self-perpetuating and self-expanding propensities
which provide a warning signal against entanglement between government and religion.