Establishment Clause

The Court is likely to indicate quickly whether it wants to take a fresh look at the establishment clause in other contexts.

In the first place, the Establishment Clause only restricted the federal government, not the states.

They said the distinction took an unduly narrow view of the establishment clause.

Under the Establishment Clause, other students have a right to be free from religious endorsement by the government.

The establishment clause exists so that the state does not endorse or protect one form of religious expression over another.

The establishment clause was not designed to exclude or mandate such a minor exercise.

This leaves establishment clause law in a somewhat odd, asymmetric state.

This approach appears to overcome the Establishment Clause issue successfully.

For years, the Court has been debating whether a perception of endorsement should be the key to analyzing an establishment clause case such as this.

This applies the Establishment Clause to the states as well as the federal government.

Stevens felt that the situation violated the establishment clause under the Endorsement Test.

He did not dismiss the Establishment Clause issue as the majority did.

The ruling was the first to declare that a state had violated the Establishment Clause.

The Establishment Clause, at the very least, prohibits government from appearing to take a position on questions of religious belief.

The plaintiffs alleged that the display violated the Establishment Clause.

Unlike the question of tax exemption, Establishment Clause issues rest on whether or not ideas themselves are primarily religious.

These days it takes increasingly less direct action by public officials to trigger Establishment Clause violations.

It is state-sponsored school prayer that violates the Establishment Clause.

This rule is known as the Establishment Clause.

Justice Kennedy added, "Substantial revision of our establishment clause doctrine may be in order."

It is precisely for these reasons that we have never found a program of true private choice to offend the Establishment Clause.

A broad reading of the Establishment Clause won out, but it seems to have its greatest current application in a public school context.

The plaintiffs challenged that the use of tax credit scholarships to send children to religious schools violates the establishment clause.

Technically it's the 'Establishment Clause', but the intent is the same.

The taxpayers claimed a violation of the Establishment Clause.