Skip to main content
are not within the scope of the First Amendment.
8
We therefore conclude that a school-run religious-
sponsored program may include material that is outside the
scope of the First Amendment, but material that is within the
scope of the First Amendment may not be sponsored by a
religious o We note that this outcome is consistent with the purpose
of the Establishment Clause. The Supreme Court has held that
the purpose of the Establishment Clause is to “avoid a state-
sponsored religious establishment.” Everson v. Bd. of Ed. of
Ewing Twp., 330 U.S. 1, 8 (1947). Thus, by allowing religious
organizations to sponsor “curriculum books” that are within
the scope of the First Amendment, the District’s policy avoids
a state-sponsored religious establishment. Although the District’s policy does not violate the First
Amendment, the Plaintiffs argue that it still violates the
Establishment Clause because it fails to provide them “the
same access to the curriculum book that is given to all other
schoolchildren” by allowing the religious organization to
sponsor their curricula while denying them the opportunity
to contribute materials of their own. Pls.’ Br. 42. This
argument is not persuasive. Under the Establishment Clause, the “Constitution
requires government neutrality among religions, and the
government may not aid one religion, say, over others.”
Kaufman, 579 F.3d at 1295 (quoting Van Orden v. Perry, 545
U.S. 677, 714 (2005) (Breyer, J., concurring in the judgment)).
To that end, the District allows parents to place curriculum
books in the school library for use by students and the
public. See Fairfax Cnty. Sch. Bd. v. Roark, 671 F.2d 973,
982 (4th Cir. 1982). The District’s policy therefore does not aid religion or provide religious parents an advantage over
other parents. At most, the policy might enable parents with
a religious affiliation to have greater access to curriculum
books than parents without a religious affiliation. But
Comments
Post a Comment