Omar Bennett
The constitutional question of Engel vs. Vitale concerned the U.S. Supreme Court case that ruled on whether voluntary prayer in public schools violated the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment prohibition of a state establishment of religion. The case centred on the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, which states that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion. The Court ruled that state officials may not compose official prayers and require that they be recited in public schools, even if the prayer was denominationally neutral and students could opt out. This decision was met with a massive public backlash, with a Gallup poll showing that 79% of Americans disapproved of the ruling.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Date | June 25, 1962 |
| Court | United States Supreme Court |
| Decision | States cannot hold prayers in public schools |
| Vote | 6-1 |
| Opinion | Justice Hugo Black |
| Concurrence | Justice William Douglas |
| Dissent | Justice Potter Stewart |
| Previous Court Ruling | New York Court of Appeals |
| Constitutional Question | Does the voluntary reading of a prayer in public schools violate the First Amendment? |
| Constitutional Amendment | First Amendment's Establishment Clause |
| Constitutional Principle | Separation of church and state |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
The Supreme Court's ruling
In Engel v. Vitale, the Supreme Court ruled that it is unconstitutional for state officials to compose an official school prayer and encourage its recitation in public schools, due to a violation of the First Amendment. The ruling concluded that state officials may not compose official state prayers and require that they be recited in public schools, even if the prayer was "denominationally neutral" and students could opt out of reciting it. The decision was based on the First Amendment's prohibition of any law "respecting an establishment of religion", which is made applicable to the states by the Fourteenth Amendment.
The case centred on the power of the state to aid religious instruction through its public school system. The New York State Board of Regents had authorized public schools to recite a short, voluntary prayer at the beginning of each school day. The prayer read: "Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers, and our Country". A group of parents challenged this government-sponsored prayer, arguing that it violated the First Amendment's Establishment Clause, which states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion".
The Supreme Court agreed with the parents in a six-to-one decision and struck down the New York prayer. The ruling was controversial and resulted in a massive public backlash against the Supreme Court. The American public's reaction to Engel included "public denunciations, picketing, billboards, letter-writing campaigns, editorials, resolutions, pay retaliation, legislation, vows of defiance, noncompliance, and calls to amend the Constitution, impeach the Justices, strip their jurisdiction, buy them Bibles, and inscribe the words 'In God We Trust' above their bench". A Gallup poll taken after the decision showed that seventy-nine per cent of Americans disapproved of the ruling.
Despite the controversy, the Supreme Court held its ground and further expanded the reasoning of the school prayer decision in later cases. The ruling in Engel v. Vitale has been the basis for several subsequent decisions limiting government-directed prayer in schools, including Schempp (which ruled the recitation of The Lord's Prayer in public school unconstitutional) and Wallace v. Jaffree (which ruled Alabama's law permitting one minute for prayer or meditation was unconstitutional).
Understanding Country Residency Requirements
You may want to see also
Public reaction
The Engel v. Vitale case was decided on June 25, 1962, by the United States Supreme Court, which ruled that states could not hold prayers in public schools as it violated the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. This decision was met with intense public reaction and debate. The ruling was widely viewed as one of the most unpopular decisions in Supreme Court history, with public furor and denunciation from various groups, particularly those of Christian faith.
The National Association of Evangelicals, the National Council of Churches, and The Christian Century opposed the decision and sought to overturn it by proposing amendments. Some members of Congress also expressed their anger and disappointment, with Frank J. Becker calling it "the most tragic decision in the history of the United States". The Senate Judiciary Committee, headed by James Eastland, held hearings on five measures to overturn the ruling. George Andrews of Alabama and James Eastland of Mississippi, for instance, attacked the Warren Court, referencing school desegregation and prayer in their statements.
On the other hand, the ruling was celebrated by most American Jewish groups, with the American Jewish Congress calling it "a great milestone". The decision was also supported by The Christian Century, which noted that Engel had not decided the question of prayer in public schools but rather focused on government-drafted prayer. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the American Ethical Union also supported the decision, filing briefs on behalf of the petitioners.
The public reaction to the Engel v. Vitale case highlighted the tension between church and state in the United States and the country's evolving religious landscape, with an increasing shift towards secularism and pluralism.
God's Word and the US Constitution: A Conflict?
You may want to see also
The Establishment Clause
The Supreme Court's decision in Engel v. Vitale centred on the interpretation of the Establishment Clause. The Court ruled that state officials composing an official school prayer and encouraging its recitation in public schools was unconstitutional, as it violated the Establishment Clause. This decision was based on the principle of the separation of church and state, with the Court concluding that any form of state-prescribed prayer, even if voluntary and non-denominational, violated this principle.
The interpretation of the Establishment Clause in Engel v. Vitale was controversial and sparked intense debate. The Court's ruling was met with strong disapproval from some members of Congress, particularly in the South and Midwest, and among Catholic clergy. Bishop James Pike, a prominent religious moderate and lawyer, opposed the ruling, arguing that the Establishment Clause was intended to prohibit the establishment of a state-sponsored church, not to prevent non-mandatory, non-denominational prayer. He proposed a constitutional amendment to limit the establishment of religion to "the recognition of an Established Church or any denomination, sect, or organized religious association".
On the other hand, the decision was celebrated by most American Jewish groups and the American Jewish Congress called the case "a great milestone". The ruling in Engel v. Vitale built upon previous Supreme Court decisions that applied the Establishment Clause to state law, such as Everson v. Board of Education in 1947, and Illinois ex rel. McCollum v. Board of Education in 1948, which centred on the power of states to aid religious instruction in public schools.
The Constitution: Multiple Copies, One Nation
You may want to see also
Explore related products
The role of state
The role of the state was a central issue in the case of Engel v. Vitale, which was decided by the United States Supreme Court in 1962. The case centred on the question of whether state officials could compose and encourage the recitation of an official school prayer in public schools, and whether this practice violated the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
The state's involvement in religious activities was the key concern. The New York State Board of Regents had authorized a voluntary, non-denominational prayer to be recited at the beginning of each day in public schools. This prayer, known as The Regents' Prayer, was written by the Board of Regents themselves and was adopted by the Herricks Union Free School District in 1958. The state's role, therefore, included the composition and promotion of this prayer.
A group of parents, including Steven Engel, objected to this practice and sued the school board president, William Vitale. They argued that the state's involvement in composing and promoting a prayer violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, which states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion". The Establishment Clause, it was argued, was intended to prohibit federal power over religion and to reserve this power for the states. However, the Supreme Court had previously incorporated the Establishment Clause into the Fourteenth Amendment, which applies to the states.
The Supreme Court's decision in Engel v. Vitale established that states cannot hold prayers in public schools, even if the prayer is voluntary and non-denominational. The Court's opinion, written by Justice Black, concluded that any prescription of religious activity by a state violates the Constitution, as it breaches the wall of separation between church and state. This decision provoked a strong negative reaction from the American public, with many disapproving of the ruling and some members of Congress attacking the Court.
Defining Common Areas in Single-Tenant Buildings
You may want to see also
The dissenting opinion
In the dissenting opinion, Justice Potter Stewart argued that the recitation of a prayer in school did not violate the Constitution because the prayer was voluntary. He believed that prohibiting prayer in schools deprived children of "the opportunity of sharing in the spiritual heritage of our Nation".
Justice Stewart's dissent was likely based on the idea that the First Amendment's Establishment Clause, which prohibits the government from establishing a religion, did not apply to voluntary prayer in schools. He may have argued that the Establishment Clause is primarily concerned with preventing the government from establishing an official state church or religion, rather than prohibiting all forms of religious expression in the public sphere.
In his dissent, Justice Stewart probably emphasized the importance of religious freedom and the role of religion in American history and culture. He may have pointed to traditions such as the inclusion of ""In God We Trust" on U.S. currency and the phrase "one nation under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance as evidence of the country's religious heritage and the important role that religion has played in public life.
Additionally, Justice Stewart might have argued that the voluntary nature of the prayer meant that it did not establish a religion or coerce students into participating in a religious exercise. He may have contended that students who objected to the prayer on religious grounds had the option to remain silent or leave the room during the prayer, as was the case in other contexts where religious activities were allowed in schools.
Weekly Car Rental: What Constitutes a Rental Company?
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
Engel v. Vitale was a landmark case in 1962 in which the United States Supreme Court ruled that it is unconstitutional for state officials to compose an official school prayer and encourage its recitation in public schools.
The constitutional question in Engel v. Vitale centred on the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, which states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion." The question was whether a voluntary morning prayer authorized by the New York State Board of Regents violated the First Amendment.
The Supreme Court ruled that states cannot hold prayers in public schools, even if the prayer is voluntary and non-denominational. The Court reasoned that the Establishment Clause prohibits the government from composing official prayers and that government involvement in religious activities breaches the separation of church and state.
The decision in Engel v. Vitale was highly controversial and provoked outrage in many quarters. There were public denunciations, picketing, billboards, letter-writing campaigns, editorials, and more. A Gallup poll taken after the decision showed that 79% of Americans disapproved of the ruling.
