How has the Supreme Court interpreted the establishment of religion clauses?

The Establishment of Religion Clauses of the Constitution of the United States are found in the First Amendment. These clauses state that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”. In the case of Everson v. Board of Education in 1947, the Supreme Court made a ruling that the Establishment of Religion Clauses should be interpreted in a broad sense. The Court stated that the clauses were intended to prevent the government from intervening in matters of religion. In Lemon v. Kurtzman in 1971, the Supreme Court decided that in order for a law to be constitutional, it must pass the three-pronged Lemon Test. This test states that the law must have a secular purpose, must not have a primary effect that advances or inhibits religion, and must not excessively entangle government and religious bodies. The Court has also interpreted the Establishment of Religion Clauses to include the Separation of Church and State. This means that the government must remain neutral in matters of religion and should not be seen to favor one religion over another. In recent decades, the Supreme Court has made rulings on various cases involving the Establishment of Religion Clauses in Tennessee. In 1995, it ruled that the state of Tennessee’s system of providing funding for religious student organizations was unconstitutional. In 2000, the Supreme Court made a ruling that a Tennessee law prohibiting the teaching of “creation science” in the state’s public schools was also unconstitutional. These rulings demonstrate the Court’s willingness to enforce the Establishment of Religion Clauses of the Constitution of the United States in Tennessee.

How has the Supreme Court interpreted the establishment of religion clauses?

Related FAQs

Related Blog Posts