Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

A.M. and a few minutes thereafter the Bible reading began with each pupil seated “at attention”. The Bible reading consists of reading, without comment, over a loud speaker ten verses of the King James Version of the Bible. Then the children stood and repeated, with the public address system leading them, the Lord's Prayer. Next, still standing, the children gave the Flag Salute. They then sat down. Announcements were made and when the announcements were completed the students went to their classrooms for the first classes of the day.

Edward Schempp, the children's father, testified that after careful consideration he had decided that he should not have Roger or Donna excused from attendance at these morning ceremonies. Among his reasons were the following. He said that he thought his children would be "labeled as 'odd balls'" before their teachers and classmates every school day; that children, like Roger's and Donna's classmates, were liable “to lump all particular religious difference[s] or religious objections [together) as ‘atheism'” and that today the word “athe'ism" is often connected with "atheistic communism”, and has “very bad” connotations, such as “un-American” or “anti-Red”," with overtones of possible immorality. Mr. Schempp pointed out that due to the events of the morning exercises following in rapid succession, the Bible reading, the Lord's Prayer, the Flag Salute, and the announcements, excusing his children from the Bible reading would mean that probably they would miss hearing the announcements so important to children. He testified also that if Roger and Donna were excaused from Bible reading they would have to stand in the hall outside their “homeroom” and that this carried with it the imputation of punishment for bad conduct.

The plaintiffs seek to enjoin the enforcement of Section 1516 as now amended and to have it and the practices carried on pursuant to it at the Abington Senior High School declared unconstitutional as an establishment of religion and as an interference with the free exercise of religion. The defendants maintain, among other things, that the plaintiffs have failed to prove that they have sustained any injury to a constitutionally protected right and that therefore they are without standing to maintain the suit at bar. The defendants insist that it follows that this court is without jurisdiction to determine whether the statute or the exercises conducted under it are constitutional. They contend also that the statute does not establish a religion and that it does not interfere with the free exercise of religion and vigorously assert that the doctrine of abstention requires this court to stay its hand.

[1, 2] As to the preliminary questions of law we think we need not say much more than that which is set out under heading “III” of our first opinion, 177 F. Supp. 402 403, except in two respects. The statute now sub judice provides, as has been said, that a child may be excused from attendance at the Bible reading on the written request of his parent or guardian. But since, as will appear hereinafter, we decide this controversy on the “Establishment of Religion" clause of the First Amendment the exculpatory phrase cannot aid the defendants' argument that the doctrine of abstention is applicable for, as we will show, there is religious establishment in this case whether pupils are or are not excused from attendance at the morning exercises. It is also true, as the defendants point out, that Section 1516 as amended by the Act of 1959, has not been long in existence, but this cannot be considered to be a decisive factor. There is no suggestion or even hint that the important issues presented by this case will be litigated in the Pennsylvania Courts. We have no doubt that substantial federal questions are presented for adjudication by the present litigation. We therefore must proceed to decide this controversy on the merits.

The attendance by the minor plaintiffs, Roger and Donna Schempp, at the Abington Senior High School is compulsory. See 24 P.S. § 13-1327 (Supp. 1960). The reading of ten verses of the Holy Bible under the present statute also is compelled by law. The reading of the verses, even without comment, possesses a devotional and religious character and constitutes in effect a religious observance. The devotional and religious nature of the morning exercises is made all the more apparent by the fact that the Bible reading is followed immediately by a recital in unison by the pupils of the Lord's Prayer. The fact that some pupils, or theoretically all pupils, might be excused from attendance at the exercises does not mitigate the obligatory nature of the ceremony for the "new" Section 1516, as

The word used by Mr. Schempp was “anti-Red.” We assume that he meant to use the word "pro-Red."

3 The Bible employed was the King James Version. See note 10 cited to the text of our first opinion, 177 F. Supp, at p. 400.

did the statute prior to its 1959 amendment, unequivocally requires the exercises to be held every school day in every school in the Commonwealth. The exercises are held in the school buildings and perforce are conducted by and under the authority of the local school authorities and during school sessions. Since the statute requires the reading of the "Holy Bible," a Christian document, the practice, as we said in our first opinion, prefers the Christian religion. The record demonstrates that it was the intention of the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to introduce a religious ceremony into the public schools of the Commonwealth.

The case at bar is governed by McCollum v. Board of Education, 333 U.S. 203, 68 S.Ct. 461, 92 L.Ed. 649 (1948). Its essential facts and those of McCollum are quite similar. They need not be compared here. As was said by Mr. Justice Black in McCollum, at p. 212, 68 S.Ct. at page 465: "[T]he First Amendment rests upon the premise that both religion and government can best work to achieve their lofty aims if each is left free from the other within its respective sphere. * * * [T]he First Amendment has erected a wall between Church and State which must be kept high and impregnable.” In Zorach v. Clauson, 343 U.S. 306, 315, 72 S.Ct. 679, 684, 96 L.Ed. 954 (1952), Mr. Justice Douglas stated, “We follow the McCollum case.", and this was reiterated in Torcaso v. Watkins, 367 U.S. 488, 494, 81 S.Ct. 1680, 6 L.Ed.2d 982 (1961). In Torcaso Mr. Justice Rutledge's dissenting opinion in Everson v. Board of Education 330 U.S. 1, 59, 67 S.Ct. 504, 532, 91 L.Ed. 711 (1947), was quoted with approval: "[W]e have staked the very existence of our country on the faith that complete separation between the state and religion is best for the state and best for religion. Remonstrance, Par. 8, 12." The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has seen fit to breach the wall between church and state.

[3] We hold the statute as amended unconstitutional on the ground that it violates the “Establishment of Religion” clause of the First Amendment made applicable to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania by the Fourteenth Amendment. We find it unnecessary to pass upon any other contention made by the plaintiffs in respect to the unconstitutionality of the statute or of the practices thereunder.

We reiterate the findings of fact made in our first opinion, handed down on September 16, 1959, as amended September 22, 1959, except those contained therein which are inconsistent with the findings specifically made in this opinion. In addition to the findings of fact in our prior opinion and in this opinion we make the following additional findings of fact and conclusions of law. Rule 52, F.R.Civ. Proc., 28 U.S.C.

FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Plaintiffs Edward Louis Schempp and Sidney Gerber Schempp are the parents and natural guardians of minor plaintiffs Roger Wade Schempp and Donna Kay Schempp, residing in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania.

2. All of the defendants reside or are located within the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

3. Minor plaintiffs Roger Schempp and Donna Schempp are presently eleventh grade students in the Abington Senior High School, Abington Township, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania.

4. At the school attended by the minor plaintiffs there is an opening period each day observed by the reading of ten verses of the Bible.

5. The reading of the Bible each day is followed by a standing recitation in unison of that portion of the New Testament known as the Lord's Prayer.

6. The attendance of each student at the ceremony of the Bible reading is compulsory unless the student produces a written excuse from his or her parent or guardian.

7. The practice of the daily reading of ten verses of the Bible in the public schools of Abington Township constitutes religious instruction and the promotion of religiousness.

8. The practice of the daily reading of ten verses of the Bible together with the daily recitation of the Lord's Prayer in the public schools of Abington Township is a religious ceremony.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The court has jurisdiction of the parties and the subject matter of this litigation under Sections 1343, 2281, Title 28 United States Code. The instant three-jadge court was properly convened pursuant to Section 2284, Title 28 United States Code, and has before it substantial federal questions for adjudica

tion.

2. The practice of reading ten verses of the Bible each day in the public schools of Abington Township is pursuant to the mandatory provisions of Section 1516 of the Pennsylvania Public School Code of March 10, 1949, as amended.

3. Section 1516 of the Pennsylvania Public School Code of March 10, 1949, as amended, violates the First Amendment to the United States Constitution as applied to the states by the Fourteenth Amendment in that it provides for an establishment of religion.

[4] 4. The combined practice of Bible reading and mass recitation of the Lord's Prayer by students in the public schools of Abington Township violates the First Amendment to the United States Constitution as applied to the states by the Fourteenth Amendment in that said practice provides for an establishment of religion.

The motion of the defendants to strike out the plaintiffs' testimony taken at the hearings in this case, prior to the amendment of Section 1516 in 1959, on the ground that the supplemental pleading states a new cause of action will be denied.

The motion of the defendants to dismiss the supplemental pleading on the ground that it fails to state a cause of action will be denied.

FINAL DECREE

The plaintiffs having filed their complaint on February 14, 1958, and having amended their complaint by authority of the court by way of a supplemental pleading filed January 4, 1961, and answers having been duly filed, and a threejudge court having been convened pursuant to Section 2284, Title 28 United States Code, and hearings having been held and testimony taken by the court, and briefs having been field and argument having been heard, now therefore it is ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED as follows:

1. The defendants are perpetually enjoined and restrained from reading and causing to be read, or permitting anyone subject to their control and direction to read, to students in the Abington Senior High School, Abington Township, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, any work or book known as the Holy Bible, as directed by Section 1516 of the Pennsylvania Public School Code of March 10, 1949, P.L. 30, as amended, in conjunction with, or not in conjunction with, the saying, the reciting, or the reading of the Lord's Prayer; provided, that nothing herein shall be construed as interfering with or prohibiting the use of any books or works as educational, source, or reference material :

2. The defendants' motion to strike out the plaintiffs' testimony taken at the hearings in this case prior to the amendment of Section 1516 in 1959 is denied ;

3. The defendants' motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' supplemental pleading on the ground that it fails to state a cause of action is denied.

THE LIBRARY OF CONGRESS,
LEGISLATIVE REFERENCE SERVICE,

Washington, D.C.
To: Senate Judiciary Committee, attention: Mr. Lipscomb.
From: American Law Division.
Subject: Freedom of religion in State constitutions.

This will refer to your request of August 15, 1962, for a compilation of State constitutional provisions regarding (a) God, Supreme Being, etc.; and (6) freedom of religion and religious practices, especially the use of prayers in the public schools. Provisions banning State aid to religions have been omitted as you instructed. The compilation is attached herewith.

HUGH C. KEENAN, Jr.,

Legislative Attorney.

ALABAMA (1901 CONSTITUTION, 1960 SUPPLEMENT) (a) God, Supreme Being

“We, the people of the State of Alabama, in order to establish justice, * * * invoking the favor and guidance of Almighty God, do ordain and establish * * *" (preamble to constitution).

ov* * * that they (all men) are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights * * *" (art. 1, sec. 1 (declaration of rights)).

(6) Freedom of religion

“That no religion shall be established by law; that no preference shall be given by law to any religious sect, society, denomination, or mode of worship; that no one shall be compelled by law to attend any place of worship; nor to pay any tithes, taxes, or other rate for building or repairing any place of worship, or for maintaining any minister or ministry; that no religious test shall be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under this state; and that the civil rights, privileges, and capacities of any citizen shall not be in any manner affected by his religious principles" (art. 1, sec. 2 (declaration of rights)).

ALASKA (1956 CONSTITUTION ; 1961 SUPPLEMENT) (a) God, Supreme Being

“We, the people of Alaska, grateful to God * * * establish this Constitution * * *" (preamble to constitution). (6) Freedom of religion

"No law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” (art. 1, sec. 4 (declaration of rights)).

"No person is to be denied the enjoyment of any civil or political right because of race, color, creed, or national origin" (art. 1, sec. 3).

ARIZONA (1910 CONSTITUTION ; 1961 SUPPLEMENT) (a) God, Supreme Being

“We, the people of the State of Arizona, grateful to Almighty God for our liberties, do ordain this Constitution” (preamble to constitution). () Freedom of religion

"Perfect toleration of religious sentiment shall be secured to every inhabitant of this State, and no inhabitant of this State shall ever be molested in person or property on account of his or her mode of religious worship, or lack of the same" (art. XX, par. 1).

“The liberty of conscience secured by the provisions of this Constitution shall not be so construed as to excuse acts of licentiousness, or justify practices inconsistent with the peace and safety of the State. * * * No religious qualification shall be required for any public office or employment, nor shall any person be incompetent as a witness or juror in consequence of his opinion on matters of religion, nor be questioned touching his religious belief in any court of justice to affect the weight of his testimony” (art. II, sec. 12).

"* * * no religious * * * test or qualification shall ever be required as a condition of admission into any public educational institution of the State, as teacher, student, or pupil * * *” (art. XI, sec. 7).

ARKANSAS (1874 CONSTITUTION ; 1961 SUPPLEMENT)

(a) God, Supreme Being

“We, the people of the State of Arkansas, grateful to Almighty God (establish this Constitution) * * *” (preamble to constitution).

“All men have a natural and indefeasible right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences * * *" (art. 2, sec. 24).

"No person who denies the being of a God shall hold any office in the civil departments of this State, nor be competent to testify as a witness in any court” (art. 19, sec. 1). (6) Freedom of religion

"All men have a natural and indefeasible right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences; no man can, of right, be compelled to attend, erect or support any place of worship; or to maintain any ministry against his consent. No human authority can, in any case or manner whatsoever, control or interfere with the right of conscience; and no preference shall ever be given, by law, to any religious establishment, denomination or mode of worship above any other” (art. 2, sec. 24).

"Religion, morality and knowledge being essential to good government, the General Assembly shall enact suitable laws to protect every religious denomination in the peaceable enjoyment of its own mode of public worship” (art. 2, sec. 25).

"No religious test shall ever be required of any person as a qualification to vote or hold office, nor shall any person be rendered incompetent to be a witness on account of his religious belief ; but nothing herein shall be construed to dispense with oaths or affirmations" (art. 2, sec. 26).

CALIFORNIA (CONSTITUTION OF 1879 ; 1961 SUPPLEMENT) (a) God, Supreme Being

“We, the People of the State of California, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, (establish this Constitution) * * *" (preamble to constitution). (6) Freedom of religion

“The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination or preference, shall forever be guaranteed in this State; and no person shall be rendered incompetent to be a witness or juror on account of his opinions on matters of religious belief; but the liberty of conscience hereby secured shall not be so construed as to excuse acts of licentiousness, or justify practices inconsistent with the peace or safety of this State" (art. 1, sec. 4).

COLORADO (CONSTITUTION OF 1876; 1957 SUPPLEMENT)

(a) God, Supreme Being

“We, the people of Colorado, with profound reverence for the Supreme Ruler of the Universe (establish this Constitution) * * *" (preamble to constitution). (b) Freedom of religion

“The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination, shall forever hereafter be guaranteed; and no person shall be denied any civil or political right, privilege or capacity, on account of his opinions concerning religion ; but the liberty of conscience hereby secured shall not be construed to dispense with oaths or affirmations, excuse acts of licentiousness or justify practices inconsistent with the good order, peace or safety of the state. No person shall be required to attend or support any ministry or place of worship, religious sect or denomination against his consent. Nor shall any preference be given by law to any religious denomination or mode of worship” (art. II, sec. 4).

“No religious test or qualification shall ever be required of any person as a condition of admission into any public educational institution of the state, either as a teacher or student; and no teacher or student of any such institution shall ever be required to attend or participate in any religious service whatever * * *" (art. IX, sec. 8).

"No person having conscientious scruples against bearing arms, shall be compelled to do militia duty in time of peace * * *" (art. XVII, sec. 5).

CONNECTICUT (CONSTITUTION; 1961 SUPPLEMENT)

(a) God, Supreme Being

“The People of Connecticut acknowledging with gratitude, the good providence of God, in having permitted them to enjoy a free government * tablish this Constitution)" (preamble to constitution).

“It being the duty of all men to worship the Supreme Being, the Great Creator and Preserver of the Universe, and their right to render that worship, in the mode most consistent with the dictates of their consciences (certain rights will follow ; for full text see below] * * *" (art. 7, sec. 1). (6) Freedom of religion

“The exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination, shall forever be free to all persons in this state; provided, that the right hereby declared and established, shall not be so construed as to excuse acts of licentiousness, or to justify practices inconsistent with the peace and safety of the state" (art. 1, sec. 3).

“No preference shall be given by law to any Christian sect or mode of worship" (art. 1, sec. 4).

"It being the duty of all men to worship the Supreme Being, the Great Creator and Preserver of the Universe, and their right to render that worship, in the mode most consistent with the dictates of their consciences; no person shall by law be compelled to join or support, nor be classed with, or associated to, any congregation, church or religious association. But every person now belonging to such congregation, church, or religious association shall remain a member thereof

« AnteriorContinuar »