Lemon V. Kurtzman
Case name: Alton T. Lemon, et al. v. David H. Kurtzman, Superintendent of Public Instruction of Pennsylvania, et al.
Year decided: (1971)
Result: 8-0, in favor of Lemon
Related constitutional issue/amendment: First Amendment (Establishment Clause)
Civil rights or civil liberties: civil liberties
Significance/precedent: The Court found that providing state financial aid to parochial schools fosters an excessive government entanglement with religion and that the "continuing state surveillance" required to ensure that certain stipulations of laws are met would ultimately entangle the state with religious matters. Also, by appropriating money to parochial schools, there would inevitably be pressure to support legislation that supports funding for religious schools. Notably, the Court devised a three-pronged test, the Lemon test, for laws concerning religion stating that a law affecting religion can only be passed if it has "secular intent," its primary effect does not advance or inhibit religion and it does not promote "excessive government entanglement with religion."
Quote from majority opinion: "The sole question is whether state aid to these schools can be squared with the dictates of the Religion Clauses. Under our system, the choice has been made that government is to be entirely excluded from the area of religious instruction, and churches excluded from the affairs of government. The Constitution decrees that religion must be a private matter for the individual, the family, and the institutions of private choice, and that, while some involvement and entanglement are inevitable, lines must be drawn."
Six-word summary: Lemon test - tests for legislation lemons.
Year decided: (1971)
Result: 8-0, in favor of Lemon
Related constitutional issue/amendment: First Amendment (Establishment Clause)
Civil rights or civil liberties: civil liberties
Significance/precedent: The Court found that providing state financial aid to parochial schools fosters an excessive government entanglement with religion and that the "continuing state surveillance" required to ensure that certain stipulations of laws are met would ultimately entangle the state with religious matters. Also, by appropriating money to parochial schools, there would inevitably be pressure to support legislation that supports funding for religious schools. Notably, the Court devised a three-pronged test, the Lemon test, for laws concerning religion stating that a law affecting religion can only be passed if it has "secular intent," its primary effect does not advance or inhibit religion and it does not promote "excessive government entanglement with religion."
Quote from majority opinion: "The sole question is whether state aid to these schools can be squared with the dictates of the Religion Clauses. Under our system, the choice has been made that government is to be entirely excluded from the area of religious instruction, and churches excluded from the affairs of government. The Constitution decrees that religion must be a private matter for the individual, the family, and the institutions of private choice, and that, while some involvement and entanglement are inevitable, lines must be drawn."
Six-word summary: Lemon test - tests for legislation lemons.