School Governance Court Cases
Case One: Lemon v Kurtzman
Action Sought
To determine whether the Rhode Island and Pennsylvania laws were constitutional.
Facts of the Case
Taxpayers, parents, and citizens sued the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to declare the 1968 Pennsylvania Nonpublic Elementary and Secondary Education Act unlawful (Global Freedom Expression, 2019). The District Court ruled in favor of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The Plaintiffs appealed to the Supreme Court.
Questions to Be Answered by the Court
- Did the Rhode Island and Pennsylvania statutes allowing parochial schools to receive a salary supplement funded by the taxpayers violate the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause?
- Were the Rhode Island and Pennsylvania laws on the allocation of funds to private religious schools to pay teachers’ salaries an unnecessary entanglement of the state and the church?
Answers Given by the Court
The District Court ruled that the Nonpublic Elementary and Secondary Education Act was not unlawful because it did not violate the First Amendment. The United States Supreme Court stated that laws that allowed the allocation of government funds to supplement teachers’ salaries in religious private schools were unconstitutional (Vile, 2023).
Reasons for Answer
The Lemon test was applied to justify the ruling. According to Gordon (2024), the Lemon Test provides three requirements that should be considered to determine whether a state’s action is unconstitutional. The court stated that the statutes created by Pennsylvania and Rhode Island increased the entanglement between religion and the government, thus concluding that they were unconstitutional.
Significance of the Case to the Schools
The case created a criteria for determining the allocation of state funds to schools.
Case Two: Mitchell v. Helms
Action Sought
To determine whether a government program that offered equipment and learning materials to learning institutions, including religious schools, was acceptable under the Establishment Clause.
Facts of the Case
According to Umpstead (2023), Mary Helms and other Jefferson Parish residents filed a suit stating that Chapter 2 of the Education and Consolidation and Improvement Act of 1981 which allowed local educational entities such as public school boards to use state funds to buy neutral, nonideological and secular equipment and materials and lend them to private schools was unconstitutional.
Questions to Be Answered by the Court
- Is Chapter 2 unconstitutional?
- Does Chapter 2 violate the Establishment Clause?
Answers Given by the Court
The court ruled that Chapter 2 is not a law respecting religious establishment because many private schools receiving the aid provided under Chapter 2 in the parish are affiliated with a religion (de Dunk, 2023).
Reasons for Answer
The court explained its ruling by stating that if nonreligious and religious schools are all eligible for state funding, nobody would conclude that the government has favored one party (Oyez, 2024).
Significance of the Case to the Schools
The case allowed religious schools to continue receiving state funding to purchase learning materials and equipment.
References
de Dunk, K. (2023, December 15). Mitchell v. Helms (2000). The Free Speech Center. https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/mitchell-v-helms/
Global Freedom Expression. (2019, October 3). Lemon v. Kurtzman. Global Freedom of Expression. https://globalfreedomofexpression.columbia.edu/cases/lemon-v-kurtzman/
Gordon, S. (2024). What is the lemon test? TalksOnLaw. https://www.talksonlaw.com/briefs/the-lemon-test-explained
Oyez. (2024). Mitchell v. Helms. https://www.oyez.org/cases/1999/98-1648
Umpstead, R. (2023). Mitchell v. Helms. Encyclopædia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Mitchell-v-Helms
Vile, J. (2023, December 15). Lemon v. Kurtzman II (1973). The Free Speech Center. https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/lemon-v-kurtzman-ii/
ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE
We’ll write everything from scratch
Question 
Instructions
Choose two court cases to investigate and evaluate. Search the library for resources related to each case. Evaluate each court case related to public school governance, including church and state. Then, write a case brief that includes:
School Governance Court Cases
identification of the case
action sought
facts of the case
questions to be answered by the Court
answers given by the Court
reasons for answer
significance of the case to the schools.
Each brief will be 1/2 a page in length for a total of 1 page.
References: Include a minimum of six scholarly sources
The Palgrave Handbook of Education Law for Schools
Trimmer, K., Dixon, R. & Findlay, Y.S. (2018). The Palgrave handbook of education law for schools. Palgrave Macmillan.
Chapter
Education, Ethics, and the Law: Examining the Legal Consequences of Unethical Judgment: Pages 105-139
Peltier v Charter Day School Case with Highlights
This document shows a court case with highlights to prepare for writing the case summary.
Case Brief Chart Template
This document is a sample of how you would write a court case brief or summary. Please also view the video “How to Write a Case Summary”.
How to Write a Case Summary
This video will show you how to write a case summary.
Optional: Use the following databases to find court cases.
Supreme Court Cases > “school board” > Narrow to Practice Area: “Education Law” – 185 cases
Nexis Uni: Cases > Federal Cases > Education Policy