Difference between revisions of "Engel v. Vitale"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (→‎References: Linked text of case)
(Replaced content with 'Page corrected by Anon')
Line 1: Line 1:
−
'''''Engel v. Vitale''''', 370 U.S. 421 (1962) was the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] decision that banned classroom prayer from [[public schools]].  Specifically, the Court ruled "state officials may not compose an official state prayer and require that it be recited in the public schools of the State at the beginning of each school day - even if the prayer is denominationally neutral and pupils who wish to do so may remain silent or be excused from the room while the prayer is being recited."[http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=370&invol=421]
+
Page corrected by Anon
−
 
 
−
Justice [[Hugo Black]], known for his judicial hostility to [[religion]] and support of [[pornography]] as [[free speech]], wrote the opinion for the 6-1 Court.  Only Justice [[Potter Stewart]] dissented.  Justices [[Felix Frankfurter]] and [[Byron White]] recused themselves.
 
−
 
 
−
Justice Black's opinion was remarkable for citing only one [[precedent]], establishing a modern record for lack of judicial authority.  His sole citation of precedent was to an opinion he himself had written, ''[[Everson v. Board of Education]]'', and it was for the purpose of referencing some historical material included in that decision rather than for its holding.
 
−
 
−
Conservative legal scholars like Erwin Griswold, Dean of the Harvard Law School, criticized this ruling. Griswold said in a major speech that the Court had no authority to prohibit prayer in public school:<ref>''Washington Star'' (Mar. 3, 1963)</ref>
 
−
 
 
−
:Congress had made no law [as required by the text of the [[First Amendment]], and] those who wrote the 'establishment of religion' clause might be rather perplexed by the use which has been made of it in 1962. ...  [I]t was unfortunate that the Court decided the case, one way or the other [because] there are some matters which are essentially local in nature ... to be worked out by the people themselves in their own communities. ...  In a country which has a great tradition of tolerance, is it not important that minorities, who have benefited so greatly from that tolerance, should be tolerant, too?
 
−
 
 
−
==References==
 
−
<references/>
 
−
* [http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0370_0421_ZS.html Full text of all opinions]
 
−
 
 
−
[[Category:law]]
 
−
[[category:United States Supreme Court Cases]]
 
−
[[category:judicial activism]]
 
−
[[category:Establishment Clause]]
 

Revision as of 14:14, January 24, 2010

Page corrected by Anon

Retrieved from "https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Engel_v._Vitale&oldid=748310"