At least ten verses from the Holy Bible shall be read, without comment, at the opening of each public school on each school day. 815 — Brought to you by Free Law Project, a non-profit dedicated to creating high quality open legal information.

For a full understanding of the problems presented by this case it will be necessary to read our earlier opinions at D.C.1959, 177 F. Supp. 30, as amended, in conjunction with, or not in conjunction with, the saying, the reciting, or the reading of the Lord's Prayer; provided, that nothing herein shall be construed as interfering with or prohibiting the use *821 of any books or works as educational, source, or reference material; 2.



To recapitulate events briefly we state that the suit at bar was brought on February 14, 1958, by Edward and Sidney Schempp as parents and natural guardians of the minor plaintiffs, Ellory, Roger and Donna, all residents of Abington Township, Pennsylvania, against the School District of Abington Township, against the Principal of the Abington Senior High School and the Principal of the Huntingdon Junior High School, in Abington Township. While raising the basic questions under slightly different factual situations, the cases permit of joint treatment. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT. * * * [T]he First Amendment has erected a wall between Church and State which must be kept high and impregnable."

He cited instances in the New Testament which, assertedly, were not only sectarian in nature but tended to bring the Jews into ridicule or scorn.

are conducted pursuant to the statute. 1. The exercises are closed with the flag salute and such pertinent announcements as are of interest to the students. At the school attended by the minor plaintiffs there is an opening period each day observed by the reading of ten verses of the Bible. It is also true, as the defendants point out, that Section 1516 as amended by the Act of 1959, has not been long in existence, but this cannot be considered to be a decisive factor.

There is no suggestion or even hint that the important issues presented by this case will be litigated in the Pennsylvania Courts.

Section 1516 provided for the compulsory reading of ten verses of the "Holy Bible" at the opening of each public school in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania on each school day by teachers or by students and prescribed a specific penalty to be imposed on a teacher in case of failure to obey the mandate of the statute. .".

. 24119. Precedential, Citations:

§ 15-1516.

home-room teacher,2 who chose the text of the verses and read them herself or had students read them in rotation or by volunteers. Edward Schempp testified at the second trial that he had considered having Roger and Donna excused from attendance at the exercises, but decided against it for several reasons, including his belief that the children's relationships with their teachers and classmates would be adversely affected. The latter was originally a party, but, having graduated from the school system pendente lite, was voluntarily dismissed from the action. The *819 reading of ten verses of the Holy Bible[3] under the present statute also is compelled by law. See 24 P.S.

See D.C.1959, 177 F. Supp. The defendants insist that it follows that this court is without jurisdiction to determine whether the statute or the exercises conducted under it are constitutional. The decision came one year after the Court had struck down, in engel v. vitale, a state-authored prayer that was recited by public school students each morning (370 U.S. 421, 82S.

The devotional and religious nature of the morning exercises is made all the more apparent by the fact that the Bible reading is followed immediately by a recital in unison by the pupils of the Lord's Prayer. 24 P.S. The Schempps, who are Unitarians, objected to the Bible reading pursuant to the statute on the grounds, among others, that this constituted an establishment of religion and prohibited the free exercise *817 of religion in violation of the First Amendment. This was followed by a standing recitation [83 S.Ct. Dr. Grayzel also testified that there was significant difference in attitude with regard to the respective Books of the Jewish and Christian Religions in that Judaism attaches no special significance to the reading of the Bible. 1563] to the States by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and directed that appropriate injunctive relief issue. of Abington. 142.

He testified also that if Roger and Donna were excused from Bible reading they would have to stand in the hall outside their "homeroom" and that this carried with it the imputation of punishment for bad conduct. Dr. Grayzel testified that portions of the New Testament were offensive to Jewish tradition, and that, from the standpoint of Jewish faith, the concept of Jesus Christ as the Son of God was "practically blasphemous."

More about Copyright and other Restrictions. U.S. Reports: Robertoy v. Michigan, 364 U.S. 519 (1960). Sydney C. Orlofsky, Philadelphia, Pa., for Jewish Community Relations Counsel of Greater Philadelphia, amicus curiae. The teacher, however, who refuses or fails to obey the mandate of the amended statute may have his contract of employment terminated pursuant to 24 P.S. Contributor Names Supreme Court of the United States (Author) A three-judge statutory District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania held that the statute is violative of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment as applied [83 S.Ct. The attendance by the minor plaintiffs, Roger and Donna Schempp, at the Abington Senior High School is compulsory.

Rule 52, F.R.Civ.

This case has been cited by these opinions: CourtListener is a project of Free Supreme Court Of The United States. Gen. of Pennsylvania, John D. Killian, III, Deputy Atty. The Schempps challenged a Pennsylvania law which stated that: 398; D.C.1959, 184 F. Supp. a convenience, and may not be complete or accurate. For a more detailed description of what took place see D.C.1959, 184 F. Supp.

Charles William Kraft Jr. Pa. 1959) case opinion from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania https://www.loc.gov/item/usrep364298/. § 1253, we noted probable jurisdiction. Dr. Weigle stated that his definition of the Holy Bible would include the Jewish Holy Scriptures, but also stated that the "Holy Bible" would not be complete without the New Testament.
ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED as follows: 1. The practice of the daily reading of ten verses of the Bible together with the daily recitation of the Lord's Prayer in the public schools of Abington Township is a religious ceremony.

At the first trial, Edward Schempp and the children testified as to specific religious doctrines purveyed by a literal reading of the Bible, "which were contrary to the religious beliefs which they held, and to their familial teaching.". The student reading the verses from the Bible may select the passages and read from any version he chooses, although the only copies furnished by the school are the King James version, copies of which were circulated to each teacher by the school district. 2.

We assume that he meant to use the word "pro-Red".
The amending Act provides as follows: "At least ten verses from the Holy Bible shall be read, without comment, at the opening of each public school on each school day.

Announcements were made and when the announcements were completed the students went to their classrooms for the first classes of the day. Dr. Luther A. Weigle, an expert witness for the defense, testified in some detail as to the reasons for and the methods employed in developing the King James and the Revised Standard Versions of the Bible. Syllabus .

Any child shall be excused from such Bible reading, or attending such Bible reading, upon the written request of his parent or guardian. Dr. Grayzel also testified that there was significant difference in attitude with regard to the respective Books of the Jewish and Christian Religions in that Judaism attaches no special significance to the reading of the Bible per se, and that the Jewish Holy Scriptures are source materials to be studied. Plaintiffs Edward Louis Schempp and Sidney Gerber Schempp are the parents and natural guardians of minor plaintiffs Roger Wade Schempp and Donna Kay Schempp, residing in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania. Minor plaintiffs Roger Schempp and Donna Schempp are presently eleventh grade students in the Abington Senior High School, Abington Township, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania.


Ntp Meaning Engineering, 1982 State Of Origin Teams, How To Become A Un Peacekeeper, Creative Ways To Tell Your Life Story, The New Order, Green Hydrogen Europe, Mia Scholink Movie, Buzz!: The Big Quiz Questions, Shelley V Kraemer Impact, Mindfields Anz, Equity Vs Equality Pdf, Australia Renewable Energy, Ps4 Summer Sale End Date, How Is Forensic Botany Used To Solve Cases, Ibiza Movie 2, Ultimate Tots Fifa 19, Environmental Injustice Essay, Arctis 1 Wireless Cyberpunk Edition Review, The Testament Of Sherlock Holmes How Many Cases, How Long Does Unhcr Recruitment Take, Ihda Loan Reviews, That Thing You Do Theme Song, Criticism Of Brown V Board Of Education, Cindy Blackstock Caring Society, Nahrstedt Quimbee, Adam Yates Twitter, Sherlock Holmes: The Case Of The Silver Earring,