Supreme+Court+Decisions

Decision: 5-4 On February 10, 1947, a divided Court held that the law did not violate the Constitution. After detailing the history and importance of the Establishment Clause, Justice Black argued that services like bussing and police and fire protection for parochial schools are “separate and so indisputably marked off from the religious function” that for the state to provide them would not violate the First Amendment. The law did not pay money to parochial schools, nor did it support them directly in any way. It was simply a law enacted as a “general program” to assist parents of all religions with getting their children to school.
 * Decision of the Supreme Court **

media type="custom" key="3526532"**
 * Majority Opinion: (Justice Black)

“Paying for the busing of parochial school students does not breach the Establishment Clause. Even though the assistance might make parents more likely to send their children to such schools, the authorization does not unduly assist the schools. The policy is general because it applies to public and private school students and does not single out those attending religious schools. The funding of busing is similar to the public payment of policemen and fireman who protect parochial school students.”

“The first amendment requires the state to be neutral in its relation with groups of religious and nonbelievers. New Jersey has not in the slightest breached a wall between church and state. **Dissenting Opinion: (Justice Rutledge **)

media type="custom" key="3526536"

“The plan supports religious training and belief through the use of government funds. The funds for the plan are taken from taxes levied on citizens of all faiths and should not be used to further the religious education of children of other faiths, thereby violating the Establishment Clause. If it is permissible to pay for the transportation to private religious school on the grounds it promotes education, then why not pay for the entire costs of the schooling on these same grounds.