Due today: periods 6 and 7 past participle sentences that were handed out yesterday.
Friday, period 8- vocabulary 1
In class: we are continuing with the close reading of Text 5, Justice Stevens.
lines 46-63
… In addition to involving the school in the selection of the speaker, the policy, by its terms,
invites and encourages religious messages. The policy itself states that the purpose of the message is "to solemnize the event." A religious message is the most obvious method of
solemnizing an event. Moreover, the requirements that the message "promote good sportsmanship" and "establish the appropriate environment for competition" further narrow the
types of message deemed appropriate, suggesting that a solemn, yet nonreligious, message, such as commentary on United States foreign policy, would be prohibited. Indeed, the only type of
message that is expressly endorsed in the text is an "invocation" - a term that primarily describes an appeal for divine assistance. In fact, as used in the past at Santa Fe High School, an "invocation" has always entailed a focused religious message. Thus, the expressed purposes of the policy encourage
the selection of a religious message, and that is precisely how the students understand the policy. The results of the elections described in the parties' stipulation make it clear that the students understood that the central question before them was whether prayer should be a part of the
pregame ceremony. We recognize the important role that public worship plays in many communities, as well as the sincere desire to include public prayer as a part of various occasions so as to mark those occasions' significance. But such religious activity in public schools, as elsewhere,
must comport with the First Amendment…
lines 64-73
One of the purposes served by the Establishment Clause is to remove debate over this
kind of issue from governmental supervision or control. We explained in Lee that the
"preservation and transmission of religious beliefs and worship is a responsibility and a
choice committed to the private sphere." The two student elections authorized by the
policy, coupled with the debates that presumably must precede each, impermissibly
invade that private sphere. The election mechanism, when considered in light of the
history in which the policy in question evolved, refects a device the District put in place
that determines whether religious messages will be delivered at home football games.
The mechanism encourages divisiveness along religious lines in a public school setting,
a result at odds with the Establishment Clause…
lines 74-79
The Religion Clauses of the First Amendment prevent the government from making any
law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. By no
means do these commands impose a prohibition on all religious activity in our public schools.
Thus, nothing in the Constitution as interpreted by this Court prohibits any public school student
from voluntarily praying at any time before, during, or after the school day. But the religious liberty
protected by the Constitution is abridged when the State affirmatively sponsors the particular
religious practice of prayer…
lines 80-84
… But the Constitution also requires that we keep in mind "the myriad, subtle ways in which
Establishment Clause values can be eroded," and that we guard against other diferent, yet equally
important, constitutional injuries. One is the mere passage by the District of a policy that has the
purpose and perception of government establishment of religion. Another is the implementation
of a governmental electoral process that subjects the issue of prayer to a majoritarian vote…
lines 85-91
As discussed, the text of the October policy alone reveals that it has an unconstitutional
purpose. The plain language of the policy clearly spells out the extent of school involvement in
both the election of the speaker and the content of the message. Additionally, the text of the
October policy specifies only one, clearly preferred message - that of Santa Fe's traditional religious
"invocation." Finally, the extremely selective access of the policy and other content restrictions
confrm that it is not a content-neutral regulation that creates a limited public forum for the expression of student speech…
lines 92-102
This case comes to us as the latest step in developing litigation brought as a challenge to
institutional practices that unquestionably violated the Establishment Clause. One of those
practices was the District's long-established tradition of sanctioning student-led prayer at varsity
football games. The narrow question before us is whether implementation of the October policy
insulates the continuation of such prayers from constitutional scrutiny. It does not. Our inquiry
into this question not only can, but must, include an examination of the circumstances
surrounding its enactment. Whether a government activity violates the Establishment Clause is "in
large part a legal question to be answered on the basis of judicial interpretation of social facts...”.
Every government practice must be judged in its unique circumstances. Our discussion in the
previous sections, demonstrates that in this case the District's direct involvement with school
prayer exceeds constitutional limits.
lines 103-109
The District, nevertheless, asks us to pretend that we do not recognize what every Santa Fe
High School student understands clearly - that this policy is about prayer. The District further
asks us to accept what is obviously untrue: that these messages are necessary to "solemnize" a
football game and that this single-student, year-long position is essential to the protection of
student speech. We refuse to turn a blind eye to the context in which this policy arose, and that
context quells any doubt that this policy was implemented with the purpose of endorsing school
prayer
No comments:
Post a Comment