Lemon v. Kurtzman 403 U.S.

Lemon v. Kurtzman 403 U.S. 602 (1971)

Facts: The Pennsylvania statute at issue provided financial support for teacher salaries, textbooks, and instructional materials for the teaching of secular subjects to non-public schools.

The case was heard concurrently with a Rhode Island statute, which provided direct salary supplements to private-school teachers. Both statutes clearly stated that the financial support was available to "church-related educational institutions." The Rhode Island trial court found that 25% of Rhode Island's elementary students were enrolled in private schools, and that approximately 95% of those students were enrolled in Roman Catholic schools. Of the approximately 250 teachers who had applied for benefits under the Rhode Island statute, all of them were employed by Roman Catholic schools. In Pennsylvania, the statute provided benefits for supplies and materials per student, and over 96% of the students benefited attended church-related schools, with the majority of those schools being Roman Catholic. Citizens and taxpayers challenged the constitutionality of both statutes. The Rhode Island statute was found unconstitutional by the District Court. The District Court that heard the Pennsylvania dispute ruled differently; it dismissed the taxpayers' claim for failure to state a claim for relief, and held that the statute did not violate the Establishment or Free Exercise clauses of the First Amendment.

Issue: Does a state statute making state financial aid available to religious-related educational institutions violate the First Amendment's Establishment and Free Exercise clauses, by violating the guarantee of separation of church and state?

Holding: The Court determined that the statutes in issue did violate the First Amendment's Establishment Clause. The Court affirmed the District Court's decision holding the Rhode Island statute unconstitutional. The Court reversed the District Court's decision holding the Pennsylvania statute constitutional.

Reasoning: The Court developed a three-part test for determining the constitutionality of laws dealing with religious establishment. This test is now referred to as "the Lemon test." To be constitutional, a statute must:

have a secular, legislative purpose; have principal effects which neither advance nor inhibit religion; and it must not foster an excessive government entanglement with religion.