School Prayers

• Author: Walter Dellinger
• Pages: 2322-2323

Page 2322

Few constitutional issues have generated as much public controversy, and as much confusion, as the question of prayer in public schools. The Supreme Court's 1962 decision in ENGEL V. VITALE concerned an official prayer that had been composed by a group of politically appointed officials, the New York State Board of Regents. The defendant school district required every school principal to direct that the Regents' prayer be recited in unison in every classroom at the beginning of each school day. The Court held that even though individual students were permitted to abstain from participating in the recitation, the program violated the ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE because it "officially establishe[d] the religious beliefs embodied in the Regents' prayer."

One year later the Court applied the principle of Engel to religious readings selected by public officials. Laws in Pennsylvania and Baltimore required every public school to begin each day with the reading of verses from the Holy Bible and group recital of the Lord's Prayer. Students were permitted to be excused from participation upon written request of a parent or guardian. In ABINGTON TOWNSHIP SCHOOL DISTRICT V. SCHEMPP, the Court held that these programs also violated the establishment clause, which the Court interpreted to preclude actions by state or federal governments that had the purpose or primary effect of either advancing or inhibiting religion. The Court noted that while the FIRST AMENDMENT permitted the study of the Bible or religion as part of its program of education, it did not permit government to organize devotional religious exercises. The fact that the particular devotionals had been selected by government officials, rather than composed by them as in Engel, was not a difference of constitutional import.

The school prayer and Bible reading decisions sparked a substantial public outcry, and repeated, unsuccessful efforts were made to overturn the decisions by amending the Constitution. The decisions were misinterpreted by some to mean that even the utterance of a private prayer by an individual student while at school was unconstitutional. What the establishment clause actually prohibited was action by government officials that endorsed or inhibited religion, and not religious activity initiated by students and not encouraged or promoted by school officials.

As subsequent decisions would make clear, the Court had never held that prayer itself was...