Aguilar v. Felton 473 U.S. 402 (1985) Grand Rapids School District v. Ball 473 U.S. 373 (1985)

AuthorLeonard W. Levy
Pages63

Page 63

In COMPANION CASES a 5?4 Supreme Court held unconstitutional the assignment of public school teachers to parochial schools for special auxiliary services. In the Grand Rapids "shared time" case, Justice WILLIAM J. BRENNAN for the majority concerned himself only with the possibility that the teachers might advance religion by conforming their instruction to the environment of the private sectarian schools. The evidence did not validate his fear. In Aguilar, Brennan expressed the same fear but focused on the "excessive entanglement of church and state" which he asserted was present in New York City's program to implement the ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION ACT passed by Congress in 1965. Advancing religion and excessive entanglement show violations of the FIRST AMENDMENT ' S SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE as construed by the Court in LEMON V. KURTZMAN (1971), where it devised a test to determine whether government has passed a law respecting an ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION.

The New York City program employed guidance counselors, psychologists, psychiatrists, social workers, and other specialists to teach remedial reading, mathematics, and English as a second language, and to provide guidance services. They worked part-time on parochial school premises, using only materials and equipment supplied by secular authorities; and, they acted under a ban against participation in religious activities. They worked under supervision similar to that which prevailed in public schools; the city monitored instruction by having supervisory personnel make unannounced "monthly" and "occasional" visits. Almost three-fourths of the educators in the program did not share the religious affiliation of any school in which they taught.

Brennan for the majority traveled a far path to find infirmities in the city's program. He expressed concern that the program might infringe the RELIGIOUS LIBERTY of its intended beneficiaries. He saw government "intrusion into...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT