Running head: RELIGION AND PUBLIC SCHOOLS 1

Artifact#6: Religion and Public Schools

Cecilia Andrade-Salcedo

College of Southern Nevada

RELIGION AND PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2

Abstract

This artifact will be about Karen White, a public school kindergarten teacher. Ms. White,

has recently changed her religion and in her newly acquired affiliation with Jehovah’s Witnesses,

she can no longer lead certain activities. This meant that she could no longer decorate the

classroom for holidays or plan for gift exchanges during Christmas season. She also could no

longer sing “Happy Birthday” or recite the Pledge of Allegiance. Parents protested and the

school principal, Mr. Ward, recommended her dismissal based on her ineffectively meeting the

needs of her students. These are the following possible outcomes when looking at landmark court

cases, public schools and religion that apply to Karen White’s situation.
RELIGION AND PUBLIC SCHOOLS 3

Artifact#6: Religion and Public Schools

Everyone has different views and beliefs when it comes to religion. In the United States,

The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution says that under the Establishment Clause the

government cannot establish a religion. Although the definition of establishment is not clear, our

Founding Fathers meant to prohibit state-sponsored churches such as the Church of England

(First Amendment and Religion). In the case of Karen White, as a citizen of the United States,

she has the right to have her own religion. However, as a teacher, she has the duty to teach her

students and be a role model. Although, she has freedom of religion, she must meet her contract

duties which are to teach the students and be a positive role model to her students.

In the case of Abington v. Shempp, in the state of Pennsylvania, public schools were

requiring students to read Bible verses at the beginning of each day. After the students completed

their daily readings, school authorities required the Abington Township students to recite the

Lord's Prayer. In the case that students would like to be excused from religious activities, they

would need to have a parent-signed note excusing the student (School District of Abington

Township, Pennsylvania v Schempp). In 1963, Murray and his mother I challenge the prayer

requirement. After the hearing of the case, the supreme court established that indeed, requiring

students to participate in religious activity in the school was indeed violating both the Free

Exercise Clause and the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment since the readings and

recitations were essentially religious ceremonies and were "intended by the State to be so

(School District of Abington Township, Pennsylvania v Schempp)." Comparing this case to

Karen White’s, her dismissal would be justified. Her dismissal would be justified under the First

Amendment and the Establishment Cause because she implementing her religion into her
RELIGION AND PUBLIC SCHOOLS 4

classroom by not following or honoring the religions and beliefs of her students. Therefore under

the Abington v. Schempp, Ms. White would be justifiably terminated.

In the case of Goss v. Lopez, Dwight Lopez and eight other students from different

schools in Ohio were suspended for misconduct. In their case, they were not given a hearing and

they filed a suit. In their suit, the students claimed violation of their Fourteenth Amendment

rights to due process. A federal court ruled in favor of the students saying that suspending

students for more than 10 days or expelling students without a hearing first, is unconstitutional.

This case was later heard by the Supreme Court, who also ruled for the students and added that

school are not to take disciplinary action s without fair procedures. Explained by the Schimmel

on Britannica.com, students have the right to property and liberty rights that are protected by due

process. The court then further added that any student being suspended should be given an “oral

or written notice of the charges against him, and, if he denies them, an explanation of the

evidence the authorities have and an opportunity to present his side of the story (Schimmel,

2014).” In the case of Karen White, she can sue the school district for being terminated unfairly

and violation of her constitutional rights. Ms. White was not giving the opportunity to explain

her side of the story or an opportunity to justify or fix her actions, which are granted in the

Fourteenth Amendment. Mr. Ward has violated Ms. White’s Fourteenth Amendment rights to

Property and Liberty as well as her right to Due Process.

In this case of Palmer v. Board of Education, Joethelia Palmer, a public schools teacher in

Chicago, refused to participate in patriotic aspects of the curriculum because of her affiliation

with the Jehovah's Witness religion (Prater). Palmer perceived the teaching of patriotism as a

kind of worship, and her religion forbade her from such activities like participating in the pledge

of allegiance, singing patriotic songs, and celebrating certain national holidays. After Ms. Palmer
RELIGION AND PUBLIC SCHOOLS 5

was hired but before the beginning of the school year, she informed her principal of her situation

and the school tried to accommodate her special circumstance, however, the school system

claimed it was not reasonably accomplished (Prater). After the hearing of this case, the school

system won. Comparing this case to Karen’s case, Mr. Ward was right to dismiss Ms. White, as it

is nearly impossible for her to properly do her job without violating her religion.

In the case of West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, The West Virginia

Board of Education required all of their students and teachers to honor the flag and refusal to do

so was considered insubordination and was punishable by expulsion and charges of delinquency

(West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette). In a six to three decision, the court decided

that requiring public school children to salute the flag violated the First Amendment (West

Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette). Under the Supreme Court’s decision for this case,

Karen would be able to sue the school for violation of her First Amendment rights. Mr. Ward,

does not have the authority to dismiss Ms. White over her religion and her refusal to honor the

flag. It is unconstitutional to “establish a religion” therefore Mr. Ward is violation not only Ms.

White’s Freedom of Religion, but the Establishment Clause as well.

In conclusion, although Karen White has constitutional rights that protect her religion,

she was rightfully dismissed by Mr. Ward because Ms. White was unable to follow contract

agreements to efficiently teach her students. Her failure to be a role model to young children, to

provide a fun learning environment and failure to meet her students’ needs are justifiable reasons

for her dismissal.

RELIGION AND PUBLIC SCHOOLS 6

References

First Amendment and Religion. (n.d.). Retrieved May 01, 2017, from

http://www.uscourts.gov/educational-resources/educational-activities/first-amendment-

and-religion

Prater, L. (n.d.). EDU 210. Retrieved May 02, 2017, from https://quizlet.com/50763244/edu-210

School District of Abington Township, Pennsylvania v. Schempp. (n.d.). Oyez. Retrieved May 2,

2017, from https://www.oyez.org/cases/1962/142

Schimmel, D. (2014, September 23). Goss v. Lopez. Retrieved April 24, 2017, from

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Goss-v-Lopez

West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette. (n.d.). Oyez. Retrieved May 2, 2017, from

https://www.oyez.org/cases/1940-1955/319us624