Difference between revisions of "Prince v. Massachusetts"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (Undo revision 737236 by Timothyjones (Talk))
Line 1: Line 1:
<div style="position:absolute; z-index:-1;position:absolute; top:-100px; right:-500px; ">[[File:President Barack Obama.jpg]]</div>In '''''Prince v. Massachusetts''''', 321 U.S. 158 (1944), the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] confirmed that there is a constitutional dimension to the right of parents to direct the upbringing of their children. "It is cardinal with us that the custody, care and nurture of the child reside first in the parents, whose primary function and freedom include preparation for obligations the state can neither supply nor hinder." 321 U.S. at 166. <ref>http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=321&invol=158</ref>
+
In '''''Prince v. Massachusetts''''', 321 U.S. 158 (1944), the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] confirmed that there is a constitutional dimension to the right of parents to direct the upbringing of their children. "It is cardinal with us that the custody, care and nurture of the child reside first in the parents, whose primary function and freedom include preparation for obligations the state can neither supply nor hinder." 321 U.S. at 166. <ref>http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=321&invol=158</ref>
  
 
== References ==
 
== References ==

Revision as of 17:16, December 25, 2009

In Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 U.S. 158 (1944), the U.S. Supreme Court confirmed that there is a constitutional dimension to the right of parents to direct the upbringing of their children. "It is cardinal with us that the custody, care and nurture of the child reside first in the parents, whose primary function and freedom include preparation for obligations the state can neither supply nor hinder." 321 U.S. at 166. [1]

References