ZELMAN V. SIMMONS-HARRIS
536 U.S. 639 (2002)
NATURE OF THE CASE: This was a dispute over an innovative program to help students
achieve academic success in a pathetic school district.
FACTS: Ohio enacted a Pilot Project Scholarship Program. The program provides tuition aid
for students in kindergarten through third grade, expanding each year through eighth grade,
to attend a participating public or private school of their parent's choosing. The program
provides tutorial aid for students who choose to remain enrolled in public school. Any
private school, whether religious or nonreligious, may participate in the program and accept
program students so long as the school meets statewide educational standards. Participating
private schools must agree not to discriminate on the basis of race, religion, or ethnic
background, or to 'advocate or foster unlawful behavior or teach hatred of any person or
group on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, or religion.' Public schools are
eligible to receive a $2,250 tuition grant for each program student accepted in addition to
the full amount of per-pupil state funding attributable to each additional student. In 2000
82% of the participating schools had a religious affiliation. None of the public schools
have elected to participate. More than 3,700 students participated of which 96% enrolled in
religiously affiliated schools. Sixty percent of these students were from families at or
below the poverty line. For each student enrolled in a magnet school, the school district
receives $7,746, including state funding of $4,167, the same amount received per student
enrolled at a traditional public school. As of 1999, parents in Cleveland were able to
choose from among 23 magnet schools, which together enrolled more than 13,000 students in
kindergarten through eighth grade. These schools provide specialized teaching methods, such
as Montessori, or a particularized curriculum focus, such as foreign language, computers, or
the arts. Respondents filed this action seeking to enjoin the program on the ground that it
violated the Establishment Clause of the United States Constitution. The District Court
issued a preliminary injunction barring further implementation of the program. The District
Court granted summary judgment for respondents. The Court of Appeals affirmed finding that
the program had the 'primary effect' of advancing religion in violation of the Establishment
Clause.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner
No comments:
Post a Comment