Freiler v. Tangipahoa Parish Board of Education

1997 court case in Louisiana

Freiler v. Tangipahoa Parish Board of Education
CourtUnited States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Full case nameHerb Freiler; Sam Smith, Individually and in his capacity as Administrator of the Estate of his minor child Steven Smith; John Jones v. Tangipahoa Parish Board of Education; E.F. Bailey; Robert Caves; Maxine Dixon; Leroy Hart; Ruth Watson; Donnie Williams, Sr.; Art Zieske, Individually and in their capacities as members of the School Board; Ted Cason, Individually and in his capacity as Superintendent of Schools
DecidedAugust 13, 1999
Citation(s)185 F.3d 337
Case history
Subsequent historyPetition for rehearing en banc denied, 201 F.3d 602 (5th Cir. 2000)
Certiorari denied, 530 U.S. 1251 (2000)
Court membership
Judge(s) sittingCarolyn Dineen King, Henry Anthony Politz, Fortunato Benavides
Case opinions
MajorityBenavides, joined by a unanimous court
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amend. I
Keywords
Evolution

Freiler v. Tangipahoa Parish Board of Education, 185 F.3d 337 (5th Cir. 1999)[1] was United States federal court case on the constitutionality of a policy requiring teachers to read aloud a disclaimer whenever they taught about evolution.

In 1987 the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in the case of Edwards v. Aguillard (482 U.S. 587) that the teaching of "creation science" constituted an establishment of religion and thus violated the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution.[2]

In April 1994 the School Board of Tangipahoa, Louisiana, adopted a policy mandating that a disclaimer was to be presented before any discussion of evolutionary biology. The policy was as follows:[3]

Whenever, in classes of elementary or high school, the scientific theory of evolution is to be presented, whether from textbook, workbook, pamphlet, other written material, or oral presentation the following statement shall be quoted immediately before the unit of study begins as a disclaimer from endorsement of such theory.

"It is hereby recognized by the Tangipahoa Parish Board of Education, that the lesson to be presented, regarding the origin of life and matter, is known as the Scientific Theory of Evolution and should be presented to inform students of the scientific concept and not intended to influence or dissuade the Biblical version of Creation or any other concept.

It is further recognized by the Board of Education that it is the basic right and privilege of each student to form his/her own opinion or maintain beliefs taught by parents on this very important matter of the origin of life and matter. Students are urged to exercise critical thinking and gather all information possible and closely examine each alternative toward forming an opinion."

Parents sued the school board for violating the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution and won in 1997 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana.[4] The schoolboard appealed and the decision was upheld by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit on January 24, 2000.[1]

The schoolboard then appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States, who on June 19, 2000, declined to hear the case in a 6–3 decision, thereby allowing the lower court decision to stand. Three conservative members of the Supreme Court dissented; Antonin Scalia and William Rehnquist, who had also dissented from the decision in Edwards v. Aguillard, were joined by 1991 George H. W. Bush appointee Clarence Thomas.[3]

See also

References

  1. ^ a b Freiler v. Tangipahoa Parish Board of Education, 185 F.3d 337 (5th Cir. 1999).
  2. ^ Edwards v. Aguillard, 482 U.S. 587 (1987)
  3. ^ a b Denial of Petition for Writ of Certiorari, 530 U.S. 1251 (2000).
  4. ^ Eight Significant Court Decisions Archived September 8, 2008, at the Wayback Machine, National Center for Science Education

External links

  • Text of Freiler v. Tangipahoa Parish Board of Education, 185 F.3d 337 (5th Cir. 1999) is available from: Findlaw  Justia  OpenJurist  Google Scholar 
  • v
  • t
  • e
Court Cases
Related
  • v
  • t
  • e
Public displays
and ceremonies
Statutory religious
exemptions
Public funding
Religion in
public schools
Private religious speech
Internal church affairs
Taxpayer standing
Blue laws
Other
Exclusion of religion
from public benefits
Ministerial exception
Statutory religious exemptions
RFRA
RLUIPA
Unprotected
speech
Incitement
and sedition
Libel and
false speech
Fighting words and
the heckler's veto
True threats
Obscenity
Speech integral
to criminal conduct
Strict scrutiny
Vagueness
Symbolic speech
versus conduct
Content-based
restrictions
Content-neutral
restrictions
In the
public forum
Designated
public forum
Nonpublic
forum
Compelled speech
Compelled subsidy
of others' speech
Compelled representation
Government grants
and subsidies
Government
as speaker
Loyalty oaths
School speech
Public employees
Hatch Act and
similar laws
Licensing and
restriction of speech
Commercial speech
Campaign finance
and political speech
Anonymous speech
State action
Official retaliation
Boycotts
Prisons
Prior restraints
and censorship
Privacy
Taxation and
privileges
Defamation
Broadcast media
Copyrighted materials
Incorporation
Protection from prosecution
and state restrictions
Organizations
Future Conduct
Solicitation
Membership restriction
Primaries and elections