Case Brief and Analysis
Title/ Citation:
School District of Abington Township v. Schempp; Murray v. Curlett, 374 U.S. 203, 83 S.Ct. 1650 (1965).
Facts:
A. The Plaintiffs are Edward Schempp and his wife.
B. The Defendant is the School District of Abington Township.
C. The Plaintiff’s contention is that their 14th and 1st amendment rights to the Constitution have been violated by making students participate in religious activities daily in school.
D. The Defendant’s defense is that students do not have to participate in reading of the bible or the national anthem. Parental consent to be excluded must be in a hand written note and given to the school.
E. The Plaintiff filed a law suit in U.S. District Court. The District Court found in favor of the Schempp Family. The School District and State Superintendent then appealed to the Supreme Court.
F. …show more content…
The District Court found in favor of the Schempp family. Before the Supreme Court heard the case the General Assembly convened and amended the law so students could be excluded from such religious activities with a note from their parent or guardian. The Supreme Court then asked the District Court to reconsider their judgment considering the law was amended. The District court still believed that this law was in violation of the Establishment Clause and the 14th Amendment. The Supreme Court agreed to hear a new appeal and consolidate the Schempp case and another case in Baltimore Murray v. Curlett.
G. The Supreme Court favored with the Schempp Family stating that the Establishment Clause was made so no religion was being promoted or religion in general was not promoted in school’s separation of church and