On December 18, 2017 the American
Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) worked in conjunction with the ACLU of Louisiana
to file
suit in federalcourt against Louisiana’s Webster Parish School
District. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of Christy Cole whose daughters, K.C.
and Ana Lopez-Cole, attend Lakeside Junior and Senior High which is a public
school within Webster Parish School District, and the ACLU is arguing that the
Webster Parish School District is violating the Establishment Clause of the
First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States by means of daily
school sponsored Christian prayer, proselytizing, and attempts to coerce
students to participate in Christian prayers regardless of the student’s religious
beliefs.
Full
descriptions of events and allegations against the school board have
been cataloged and highlight specific and repeated instances where the
Establishment Clause has been violated by the School Board. These accounts show
that Christy Cole has had a long standing battle with the School Board over
their apparent violation of the Establishment Clause, and that she has
attempted to bring the issue to the attention of many authorities within the
school district before taking legal action. Since the issue is now being
reviewed in federal court, the question that must be answered by the judiciary
is whether or not the practices of schools in the Webster Parish School
District violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
Christy Cole’s daughters, K.C. and
Ana Lopez-Cole, have been students in the Webster Parish School District since
elementary school, and they and their mother allege that school sponsored
prayer and proselytizing has been happening since their careers as students
began. According to the Cole family and other students the Central Elementary
School as well as Lakeside Junior and Senior High School have a deeply
ingrained practice in which students are selected to read the Pledge of
Allegiance and a Christian prayer, consisting of The Lord’s Prayer and
other bible verses, over the school’s PA system every morning. Many teachers at
the schools also require students to pray as a group before lunch every day.
The Cole sisters were selected on multiple occasions to read the Pledge of
Allegiance and morning prayers, however they faced repercussions from the
school after reading the pledge but refusing to read the prayer. Ms. Cole complained
to the school about the mandatory prayers, but instead of an answer school
officials mocked Ms. Cole and insinuated that she is not Christian and
therefore cannot understand Christians or Christian practices. Ms. Cole
informant school officials that she is in fact a practicing Christian and
against school sponsored prayer regardless of the faith promoted. The principal
then admitted that he “would remove his own son from school if he were forced
to observe Islamic Prayer”. A few years later Ana Lopez-Cole describes
witnessing a heated dispute between a group of teachers and students about the
card game “Magic: The Gathering” in which teachers exclaimed that the game was
“against the bible” and “of the devil”. The schools have also been known to bring
in evangelizers, such as a ministry of Christian bodybuilders known as Team
Impact and the Fellowship of Christian Athletes (FCA),
to speak to and proselytize to students during school assemblies. During K.C.’s
eighth-grade year students were taken into the gym for an assembly with the FCA
when the school was put on lockdown during the event because of a security
incident. During the lockdown students were not allowed to leave the gym and an
adult representing the FCA used the time during the lockdown to deliver a
sermon to the students. Ms. Cole continued complain to the school board about
the frequent instances of school sponsored prayer and received a response from
Johnny Rowland who at the time was the Lakeside Principal but now serves as the
Superintendent of Webster Parish Schools. Mr. Rowland told Ms. Cole that “I
will stop when someone makes me stop”. In September of 2017 Lakeside
participated in “See You At The Pole” and event whose own website describes it as “a day committed to
global unity in Christ and prayer for your generation”. Lakeside’s 2017
graduation ceremony was even held in Pentecostal Church and was presided over
by a minister who delivered an invocation and closing benediction.
For the reasons dictated above and
for the additional examples listed in the formal petition to the court, I
believe that the practices of schools in the Webster Parish School District
very clearly violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The fact
that a public school district is enforcing daily prayers by punishing students
who do not participate shows blatant coercion to conform to specific religious
practices on the part of school administrators, and the proselytizing performed
by religious groups during school assemblies where students are not allowed to
leave shows a clear intent on the part of the Webster Parish School Board to
establish and promote a specific religion as well as prevent Non-Christian
students from expressing their religious beliefs. I believe that this case
presents a very clear choice for the judiciary to make in defense of religious
liberty and the First Amendment. The courts should look to the precedent set
by Engle v. Vitale
(1962) in which prayer to begin school in New York State was
declared unconstitutional on the grounds that it violated the Establishment
Clause.
I completely agree with Dan's conclusion that this public school district is violating the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. Using the Lemon Test set forth in Lemon v. Kurtzman, it is clear that the Webster Parish district is engaging in activity with particular Chrisitan purposes so the ruling in favor of the plaintiff would be secular. Also by banning these prayers and religious activities the government would neither hinder nor promote any particular religion since religion can be practiced outside of a public school.Finally ruling in favor of the Plaintiff would reduce government entanglement with religion as it would prevent this public school from promoting and coercing Christianity onto the students. The precedent created in Abington v. Schempp, which forbid morning prayers in state-run schools can also be cited. It is shocking to read that such practices still take place in public schools despite the fact that the rulings in nearly identical cases were made in the 1960s.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Dan that the Webster Parish School District is clearly violating the establishment clause by aligning with Christianity in a public school system. I clicked on the website link that Dan provided for the “See You At The Pole” event, and it was astonishing to see that right on the home page was God’s name. Clearly this school district has been promoting christianity and in doing so is violating the establishment clause. Of course, if this were a private school it would be acceptable to aline with a certain religion, yet when the government is providing the education, i.e. public schools, a legal issue arises. Ms. Cole has a strong case against the school board and I believe that she should go as far as to try to remove Mr. Rowland from his position as superintendent of Webster Parish Schools. Mr. Rowland showed intent to knowingly break the law, as seen from his language “I will stop when someone makes me stop”. This direct infringement on the establishment clause is punishable under the law.
ReplyDeleteWhile I mainly agree with Dan's claims brought from this school prayer case I do believe that the solution must be fixed and not the actions of the school. The school just be forced to grant exemptions for any student not willing to go through these prayers as forcing them would be in direct violation of the student's rights to free exercise. The punishment being handed down, in this case, is unconstitutional and represents a long list of infringements after West Virginia v Barnette in which schools have religious prayers and demand that all students and faculty members stand at attention. The prayers are clearly focused on one religion as the court has previously fought back against in school prayers, but the message should not be to ban prayer altogether it should be based on granting a full exemption to the people who are religiously motivated to not follow the religious orders of this school.
ReplyDeleteI agree that this is a clear violation of the establishment clause of the first amendment. I do not think there is any place for mandatory praying in any public schools. Public schools should be teaching academic concepts and not forcing religious beliefs upon students. I think if individual students want to pray on their own, that is fine and that is their right under the free exercise clause. However, I do not think the school should be involving itself in that practice in anyway, or promoting any religion. School should be a secular place to learn, not a place in which religion is imposed. I think an exemption to students who do not want to follow the religious mandates of the school does not fix the problem, would ostracize students who do not agree with the religious beliefs being portrayed, and there would still be a violation to the constitution occurring as there would still be a clear Christian bias. I do not think students should be banned from praying, but it should not be an organized and mandated activity.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Dan's judgement of the case, that this is in fact a clear violation of the establishment clause of the First Amendment. Public schools are expected to provide a secular environment, so I do not understand the nature of mandatory praying in said environment. Rather than having students recite prayers, that they likely do not understand, I feel it would be significantly more beneficial to teach students about the prayers, having them understand the history and origin of them. If the school wants to offer praying, they should do so as an optional activity, and hold a variety of different opportunities for a multitude of different religions.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with Dan that the Webster Parish School District is violating the Establishment Clause. The way that this public school is operating leaves the religious minority students no other option but to conform to the religious practices of the majority of the school. The fact that this is a public school that clearly has an established religion and coerces the students to pray in class violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. I also don’t like that the school told the student’s parents that they were just not Christians who didn’t understand Christian practices even though promoting any type of religion in public schools is unconstitutional.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Dan in his statement that the Webster Parish School District is violating the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. If it were a private school I would argue that it is the school's choice but because it is a public school funded by the state, forcing students to pray and recite Christian prayers every day is clearly a violation of the Establishment Clause. Not only is this requirement a violation of the Establishment Clause, but I would also argue that it is a violation of the Free Exercise clause for the religious minorities in attendance at the school who are being forced to participate in these daily prayers. In this way, this case is similar to Minersville School District v. Gobitis in which students were forced to salute the flag even though it went against their religious beliefs. In both cases, students are being coerced into acting in a way that may go against their own beliefs which limits their free exercise of religion.
ReplyDeleteI think it is clear in the comments that everybody (including me) sees this as a case where the First Amendment is being violated. The question then goes to how the school board should go about resolving the issue. Because I believe this is more of a violation of the Establishment clause than the Free Exercise Clause, I think that the school should seek to take out the ideology of religion altogether, rather than just granting an exemption to students who do not want to participate. My reasoning for this belief lies in the fact that I do not think children should be alienated and made to feel "different" than all of their other peers just because they may not believe in the same religion as the majority. Schools are a place to learn math, science, history, etc. and religion can be taught in one's home or within a place of worship.
ReplyDeleteI do not see how there is any doubt that the school district has violated the establishment clause. I found the response of the school district to be very revealing itself. They argued Cole could not understand the practices of the school due to her lack of understanding of the Christian faith, I believe that response demonstrates just how established the religious practices of this public school district have become. Point 4 and 11 of the "Joint Statement of Current Law on Religion in Public Schools", published by the ACLU, would indicate students should not be coerced or even simply encouraged to participate in religious activities. Any teacher or administrator which practices encouragement or coercion would be in violation of the establishment clause. Furthermore, the precedent set by West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette would also indicate schools cannot coerce students into performing actions that would oppose their religious beliefs. The school district should be brought to court and forced to stop these practices to prevent further violation of these students' constitutional rights.
ReplyDelete