A few of you have told me you are getting confused by how many tests the Court seems to use for the Establishment Clause. I think this is the result of cases like Agostini, and Helms, and Zelman (and Zobrest and Witters),
But notice these cases were all decided under the (now) two-part Lemon/Agostini purpose and effect test. The discussion of neutrality plus indirection is just a way of demonstrating that none of the laws upheld in these cases had the effect of advancing religion or endorsing religious indoctrination. Everybody got secular remedial education, every deaf child got a sign-language interpreter, every low-income student in the failing public school system got a voucher, and so on. It is the same test applied to different factual situations. Rather than be confused, look for the pattern which should help you understand all of these cases.
Let's start class today focusing on this.
No comments:
Post a Comment