Basis for Secular Education
"Lee v. Weisman represented a major political blow for proponents of prayer in the public schools." ("Lee v Weisman - Impact"). Essentially, the case was a puzzle piece, amongst many others that reformed public schools into secular institutions of education. "In Engel v. Vitale (1962), the Court barred prayer in the public schools as an unhealthy union of church and state. This position was affirmed and expanded in Abington School District v. Schempp (1963), in which the Court ruled that school-sponsored devotional activities and Bible readings were unconstitutional under the Establishment Clause. The Court has continued to adhere to a rigorous interpretation of the Establishment Clause in cases including Board of Education of Kiryas Joel v. Grumet (1994), where the Court found that the creation of a special school district to accommodate the needs of a community comprising entirely of Hasidic Jews was unconstitutional under the Establishment Clause." ("Lee v Weisman - Impact"). With every education-and-religion case that has come to the Supreme Court, a new guideline and restriction has fallen upon public schools that have slowly aggregated into the edict that forces public schools to be secular. Among those amassed restrictions is the one from Lee v Weisman that bars public schools from including prayer in school-sponsored ceremonies. As a result, Lee v Weisman has contributed a guideline that has made schools more secular.
"Lee v. Weisman represented a major political blow for proponents of prayer in the public schools." ("Lee v Weisman - Impact"). Essentially, the case was a puzzle piece, amongst many others that reformed public schools into secular institutions of education. "In Engel v. Vitale (1962), the Court barred prayer in the public schools as an unhealthy union of church and state. This position was affirmed and expanded in Abington School District v. Schempp (1963), in which the Court ruled that school-sponsored devotional activities and Bible readings were unconstitutional under the Establishment Clause. The Court has continued to adhere to a rigorous interpretation of the Establishment Clause in cases including Board of Education of Kiryas Joel v. Grumet (1994), where the Court found that the creation of a special school district to accommodate the needs of a community comprising entirely of Hasidic Jews was unconstitutional under the Establishment Clause." ("Lee v Weisman - Impact"). With every education-and-religion case that has come to the Supreme Court, a new guideline and restriction has fallen upon public schools that have slowly aggregated into the edict that forces public schools to be secular. Among those amassed restrictions is the one from Lee v Weisman that bars public schools from including prayer in school-sponsored ceremonies. As a result, Lee v Weisman has contributed a guideline that has made schools more secular.
"From where I sit, it does seem that society as a whole has become more secular, has become more open to different kinds of people." (Wiesman).
-- Merith Weisman on society's shift towards secularization.
"...I believe the decision followed the movement of recognizing the separation of church and state (here – the local public school)." (Kinsinger)
-- Elizabeth Kinsinger on the secular impact of the case.
Alternative to the Lemon Test
"The proper separation of church-state relations has been an intensely divisive issue for the Justices on the current Court. A majority of the Justices have expressed immense dissatisfaction with the test that the Court enunciated in 1971 in Lemon v. Kurtzman." (Weinhaus). "Justice Kennedy, writing for the Court, specifically declined either reliance upon or reconsideration of the limited separationist test contained in Lemon v. Kurtzman's secular purpose, secular effect and non-entanglement test." (Mangrum). "During the Lee v. Weisman case, however, the Court, while purporting to apply Lemon, in fact ignored the Lemon framework entirely -- paying lip service to the case in only one brief instance in the majority opinion. Instead of relying on Lemon, the Court focused on the coercive nature of the school prayer in question, creating a new coercion test to govern Establishment Clause analysis..." (Weinhaus). "Justice Kennedy... announced a newly minted combined endorsement and coercion test. The endorsement of religion came as a result of the school's participation in (1) deciding that an invocation and benediction be given; (2) choosing the religious participant, here a rabbi; and (3) giving the rabbi directions and guidelines that the prayer should be non-sectarian." (Mangrum). This new test became more satisfactory because it better reconciled the twin religious clauses : free expression and establishment.
"The proper separation of church-state relations has been an intensely divisive issue for the Justices on the current Court. A majority of the Justices have expressed immense dissatisfaction with the test that the Court enunciated in 1971 in Lemon v. Kurtzman." (Weinhaus). "Justice Kennedy, writing for the Court, specifically declined either reliance upon or reconsideration of the limited separationist test contained in Lemon v. Kurtzman's secular purpose, secular effect and non-entanglement test." (Mangrum). "During the Lee v. Weisman case, however, the Court, while purporting to apply Lemon, in fact ignored the Lemon framework entirely -- paying lip service to the case in only one brief instance in the majority opinion. Instead of relying on Lemon, the Court focused on the coercive nature of the school prayer in question, creating a new coercion test to govern Establishment Clause analysis..." (Weinhaus). "Justice Kennedy... announced a newly minted combined endorsement and coercion test. The endorsement of religion came as a result of the school's participation in (1) deciding that an invocation and benediction be given; (2) choosing the religious participant, here a rabbi; and (3) giving the rabbi directions and guidelines that the prayer should be non-sectarian." (Mangrum). This new test became more satisfactory because it better reconciled the twin religious clauses : free expression and establishment.
"Lee v. Weisman certainly created a new test – referred to as the “coercion” test – which is a test used to evaluate cases brought pursuant to the Establishment clause." (Kinsinger).
-- Elizabeth Kinsinger on the impact of the case on the Lemon Test.
The Supreme Court's Altered Focus
"Weisman has indicated that a majority of the Court has signalled a retreat from the longstanding history tradition formula when dealing with the public school context." (Weinhaus). For example, "Justice Scalia, writing in dissent, recommended the theory of accommodation-ism as an alternative to strict separationism... Justice Scalia opined that "the Establishment Clause must be construed in light of the 'government policies of accommodation, acknowledgement, and support for religion [that] are an accepted part of our political and cultural heritage." (Mangrum). Another example from the dissent was the suggestion of reconciliation-ism. "Reconciliation-ism begins with the simple insight that the establishment clause cannot coherently prohibit religious incursions in the public realm demanded by the free exercise clause... Applied to the issue of graduation prayers, reconciliation-ism would examine the impetus behind the religious incursions into the public forum, label them as such, and then determine their appropriateness in light of the circumstances presented." (Mangrum). While these focus benefit the dissent, "The case has also changed the way the Court regards religion in schools, being that the presence of governmental coercion overrides any showing that the practice is strongly rooted in history and tradition... Instead of focusing on the long-standing and historical traditions expressed in the Lemon test, Justice Kennedy, who authored the majority opinion, focused instead on the special context of public schools and their relation to and dependence on the government." (Weinhaus).
"Weisman has indicated that a majority of the Court has signalled a retreat from the longstanding history tradition formula when dealing with the public school context." (Weinhaus). For example, "Justice Scalia, writing in dissent, recommended the theory of accommodation-ism as an alternative to strict separationism... Justice Scalia opined that "the Establishment Clause must be construed in light of the 'government policies of accommodation, acknowledgement, and support for religion [that] are an accepted part of our political and cultural heritage." (Mangrum). Another example from the dissent was the suggestion of reconciliation-ism. "Reconciliation-ism begins with the simple insight that the establishment clause cannot coherently prohibit religious incursions in the public realm demanded by the free exercise clause... Applied to the issue of graduation prayers, reconciliation-ism would examine the impetus behind the religious incursions into the public forum, label them as such, and then determine their appropriateness in light of the circumstances presented." (Mangrum). While these focus benefit the dissent, "The case has also changed the way the Court regards religion in schools, being that the presence of governmental coercion overrides any showing that the practice is strongly rooted in history and tradition... Instead of focusing on the long-standing and historical traditions expressed in the Lemon test, Justice Kennedy, who authored the majority opinion, focused instead on the special context of public schools and their relation to and dependence on the government." (Weinhaus).
"...the Court's decision to ignore the Lemon test is particularly significant in light of the Court's failure to address impressive historical and traditional evidence supporting prayer at graduation and civic ceremonies. The court has often utilized the history and tradition of a challenged practice to show that it involved no significant danger or raising a religious purpose, effect or entanglement. Yet, in Weisman, the existence of substantial historical approval of the challenged graduation prayers was not used to support the result that the Court reached." (Weinhaus).
-- Amy Louise Weinhaus on the shift from tradition to coercion.
"...our case has been used in other church-state cases over the years pretty regularly. So, whenever there's another church-state case, our case is brought up. And there's been no losses in church-state cases since, so, it's at least used in other ways. It was used in the atheist case -- the student with the atheist with the cross in Rhode Island not that long ago -- and it was also used in the Boy Scout ruling actually, so it comes up on a regular basis beyond graduation. It was also used around college graduation..." (Weisman).
-- Merith Weisman on how the Lee v Weisman case has contributed to the Supreme Court.
"Lee v. Weisman was relied upon in the decision involving the Santa Fe Independent School District which held that allowing student-led prayer at a football game was unconstitutional. Typically before this decision, student-led activities were given more of a ‘pass’ in the analysis under the Establishment clause because it was perceived the student was acting and not the government. The coercion test allows for a “broader picture” approach to analyzing the situation. The Court focused on the coercive nature of the activity and, even though it was argued people could “opt not to participate,” the activity was still unconstitutional." (Kinsinger).
-- Elizabeth Kinsinger on the effects of the case on Supreme Court focus.