Freedom of Religion Flashcards
Despite the Free Exercise Clause, if relevant to a particular case, a court may __________.
Although the Free Exercise Clause protects the freedom of belief, perhaps absolutely, a court may assess whether a person who says he acted based upon religious beliefs actually held the beliefs claimed. The idea behind this Clause is to prohibit the government from punishing conduct just because it is religious.
What is the three-part Lemon test?
The three-part Lemon test, applied in cases in which there is no preference for one religious group over another, is that:
- The action has a secular purpose,
- The action has a primary effect that neither advances nor inhibits religion, and
- The action does not produce excessive government entanglement with religion.
Which of the following activities involving public schools is valid under the Establishment Clause?
A– A voluntary moment of silent prayer or meditation at the beginning of the schoolday.
B– Posting of the Ten Commandments in a public school pursuant to legislature’s declaration that the posting is for a secular purpose.
C– A school policy whereby students themselves decide whether to hold a student invocation ceremony prior to athletic events.
D– A program whereby, once weekly, the schoolday ends one hour early so that interested students may participate in voluntary religious classes in a separate location from the school.
A program whereby, once weekly, the school-day ends one hour early so that interested students may participate in voluntary religious classes in a separate location from the school is valid.
Pursuant to statute, a state’s department of education provides model lesson plans to any school or school district in the state requesting such plans. A private religious school whose curriculum is more than 50% religious matters applied for and received model lesson plans for the nonreligious subjects taught in its classrooms.
What is the best argument supporting the constitutionality of the state’s statutory policy of providing model lesson plans to this private religious school?
The Establishment Clause prohibits the government from taking action respecting the establishment of religion. Where no sect preference is involved, government action will be upheld if it serves a secular purpose, its primary effect neither advances nor inhibits religion, and it does not produce excessive government entanglements with religion.
If law limits religion, apply the free exercise issue analysis. What is this?
The limit of religion is valid if generally applicable but invalid if it targets specific religious practices/religions.
If law supports religion, apply the Establish issue analysis. What is this?
Use the Lemon test. If the law is valid it will:
(i) have a secular purpose
(ii) has primary effect that neither advances nor inhibits religion
(iii) no excessive entanglement between Church and State
The federal government recently constructed a radio telescope in Puerto Rico. In addition to receiving radio signals, the telescope was set up to beam radio waves far out into space. As part of the bill providing for operational funding for the facility, Congress provided for a program to “inform any aliens who might be listening in outer space of the ‘American Way of Religion.’” A $10 million appropriation was provided; any religious group whose membership exceeded 500 members in the United States was permitted to prepare a five-minute presentation, and the federal government would pay for the recording of the presentations and broadcast them into space using the transmitter in Puerto Rico. The President signed the bill and it became law. A religious group with a large following in Europe, but only 100 members in the United States, protested and filed suit.
Will the court find the religious broadcasts to be constitutional?
B - Yes, because the commerce power is not limited by First Amendment prohibitions.
C - No, because the requirement of a minimum number of members violates the First Amendment.
D - No, because the broadcasts are a waste of money and exceed the spending powers of Congress.
(C) The court will find that the requirement of a minimum number of members violates the Establishment Clause, which prohibits any law “respecting an establishment of religion.”
While usually the Lemon three-part test is used to determine whether legislation creates improper government involvement with religion, the “compelling government interest” test is used if a law or government program discriminates among religions. Here, the law differentiates among different religious groups, allowing only those with larger memberships to record presentations. There is no compelling government interest for discriminating among the religious groups in this way; thus the legislation is unconstitutional.
Which of the following is true regarding a law or government program that contains a preference for some religious sects over others?
A - It must be necessary to serve an important government interest
D - It must be necessary to serve a compelling government interest
A law or government program must be necessary to serve a compelling government interest if it includes a preference for some religious groups over others. Government actions that include sect preferences must meet a strict scrutiny standard to be valid under the Establishment Clause.
A city ordinance that gave churches veto power over the grant of liquor licenses for businesses within a quarter mile of the church was struck down by the state’s supreme court. In its decision, the court noted that even if the ordinance were not a violation of the federal Establishment Clause, it clearly violated a provision in the state constitution requiring the separation of church and state because it delegated governmental authority to the churches. The supreme court opinion also harshly criticized the city council for passing an ordinance that was clearly a violation of state law.
To comply with the court’s decision and avoid future criticism, the city council adopted an ordinance prohibiting any cleric from sitting on any public board within the city. A cleric who is currently on a school board within the city brings a suit in federal district court to have the ordinance declared unconstitutional.
How should the court rule?
A - Uphold the ordinance, because it has a secular purpose and it does not promote excessive entanglement between government and religion.
B - Uphold the ordinance, because the previous court decision was based on adequate and independent state grounds.
C - Hold the ordinance unconstitutional, because its passage violated the cleric’s right to procedural due process.
D - Hold the ordinance unconstitutional, because it violates the Free Exercise Clause.
The ordinance should be held unconstitutional because it violates the Free Exercise Clause. The Free Exercise Clause generally prohibits government from acting in a way that interferes with the free exercise of religion. The Supreme Court has found the Clause to provide almost absolute protection for religious belief. Here, the city is prohibiting clerics from serving on public boards. Essentially, the ordinance takes away a right of citizenship merely because a person has chosen to become a religious cleric. Such punishment of religious belief is prohibited, either absolutely or at least unless the discrimination is necessary to achieve a compelling government interest. No such compelling interest is present.
Adherents of a particular religion whose tenets focused mostly on business practices forbade women from studying their sacred texts. A group of college students who were adherents of that religion applied to use an empty room at their state college to study sacred texts. The school permitted numerous student groups to use its facilities for extracurricular activities during times when classes were not in session. However, the school administration denied the requests from the group in question, claiming that it would be in violation of a state statute forbidding any group using public facilities to discriminate on the basis of race or gender. The students brought an action in federal court challenging application of the statute to them by the school administration.
If the court finds the actions of the school valid, what is the most likely reason?
A - Permitting the religious group to hold the meeting in a public school facility would violate the Establishment Clause, applicable to the state under the Fourteenth Amendment.
B - The statute is the least restrictive means of advancing the state’s compelling interest in ending discrimination by groups using public facilities.
C - Allowing student groups to use classroom facilities when classes are not in session does not constitute state action for purposes of the Fourteenth Amendment.
D -The right of freedom of association does not apply to groups involved in business and commercial activities.
If the school’s action is valid, it will be because the state statute is the least restrictive means of advancing the state’s compelling interest in ending discrimination by groups using public facilities. While schools are generally not public forums, they may become a designated public forum by being held open to student groups for meetings. In that case, the First Amendment may be violated if a college restricts use of its classrooms based on the content of a student group’s speech.
To justify content-based regulation of otherwise protected speech, the government must show that the regulation is necessary to achieve a compelling state interest that cannot be satisfied by less restrictive means. Similarly, the right to associate for expressive purposes is not absolute. At the very least, the right may be infringed to serve a compelling government interest, unrelated to the suppression of ideas, that cannot be achieved through means significantly less restrictive of associational freedoms. Here, the state’s interest in not allowing its facilities to be used by groups practicing discrimination of various types is compelling. The denial of access to the student group based on the students’ religious principles, while it may be viewed as content-based discrimination, is the most narrowly drawn means of advancing the state’s interest.
