Religious Expression Case Analysis and Rationale

Kirk Summers

Grand Canyon University

EAD-505-0500: Education Law

Scot Beckerman

July 14, 2021,

 Religious Expression Case Analysis and Rationale

Kirk Summers

Case 13 is a great example of what a principal might encounter during their

administration career. This case has many different aspects that could be focused on, but as a
new principal in this situation, I had to focus on the legality of the situation. The one thing that I
would have to explore, is to look at the division of church and state. So I will begin by going
through the case analysis and use this form to support my rationale.

This case deals with LPMS curriculum committee wanting to propose and present a
religious studies program that uses different religious literature as text books. This upset a
community member who is against religion in schools and wants a definite separation of church
and state. This creates the issue of whether this curriculum violates church and state laws. This
case involves all stakeholder: Board of Trustees, Administration, Teachers, Students, Parents,
and community members.

First, since this has not reached the board of trustees, I would remove the presentation
from the agenda, to be able to further investigate any concerns. I would want to meet with Ms.
Wright and listen to her side of the case at hand. Next, I would need to research case laws and
state laws regarding this issue. I would also need to spend some time with my superintendent to
go over my findings and get his/hers’ direction on the matter.

With standing my previous remarks, I did spend some time looking into the idea of a
religious curriculum. This topic is a slippery slope and the outcomes could go either way. As a
principal, this is not a battle that I feel I would want to get into. I did find a couple of cases that
guided me to abandon the idea of a religious studies course.

The first case: State Ex Rel. Weiss v. City of Edgerton (Wisc.) (1890) stated the following;

In 1890, the Wisconsin Supreme Court held that reading the King James Bible in public schools
violated the state constitution's protection of religious liberty. In this early case, the court said
that the "priceless truths of the Bible are best taught to our youth in the church, the Sabbath and
parochial schools, the social religious meetings, and, above all, by parents in the home circle." 

The second case: Board of Education of the City of Cincinnati v. Minor (1872)

The ruling in Board of Education of the City of Cincinnati v. Minor (Ohio S. Ct. 1872), authored
by Justice John Welch, upheld a school-board decision prohibiting religious instruction from the
Bible in public schools, thus serving as a precursor to the debate the Supreme Court would take
up in the 20th century. Although the First Amendment prohibits the establishment of religion
and protects freedom of speech, its provisions initially were limited only to the national
government, so religious instruction and religious exercises in public schools did not receive
much public attention until relatively recently.
 Studying these cases has given me the understanding that it would be best for all to not
institute a religious studies curriculum. I would have to side on that it would be a violation of the
church and state law. Now, this is my judgement call as the principal since I feel that this would
bring unnecessary light upon the students and the school district. No matter how many great
achievements a school as accomplished, this would be a huge blemish on the school, the district,
the teachers, and the students.

My first priority must be the students and their safety. Drawing media attention and
others to invade the privacy of students and staff is not going to happen on my watch. To this
end, I would recommend that the committee look into different curriculum ideas instead. I am
not against a religious studies curriculum, but this does not deal with my opinion but deals with
students and what is best for their academic progress.
 References

State Ex Rel. Weiss v. City of Edgerton (Wisc.) (1890)

Board of Education of the City of Cincinnati v. Minor (1872)

https://mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/660/board-of-education-of-the-city-of-

cincinnati-v-minor