Principle Three: School Attendance
In Pierce v Society of Sisters, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled parents can send their children to the school of their choice. The state is required to provide education, but the parent is responsible for choosing the location of the education.
Parents are responsible for a child’s education. They must make the key choices regarding educational direction and set the tone for accountability. The school is the medium for content delivery and an important part of the educational team. Today’s educational system is full of choices for students and parents can maximize these opportunities. Regardless of the options, students must be present to reach their potential.
Attendance at school begins the lifelong habit
As parents and students navigate the road to adulthood, schools must provide options and support to assist along the way. Pierce, Governor of Oregon, et al. v. Society of the Sisters of the Holy Names of Jesus and Mary, 268 U.S. 510 (1925)
Facts: The State of Oregon amended the Compulsory Education Law in 1922. The new law was to become effective in 1926. Prior to this time, students could attend private schools, but the new law required all students between the ages of eight and sixteen to attend public schools. Students could be exempt from this ruling for specific reasons, but private schools would no longer be acceptable. Two private schools challenged the law and won in Oregon District Court. The State of Oregon appealed the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Issues: Did the revisions to the Compulsory Education Law hinder parents’ rights to raise their children according to their own design?
Ruling: The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the Oregon District Court decision. The court believed the state should have an interest in schools, but it should not override the power of a parent to choose which school their child
Despite the ruling of the Supreme court for the states to desegregate their schools, there was some resistance to the ruling. This prompted the Supreme court to make another ruling in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (2) (n.d.). The ruling, in this case, ordered states to immediately comply with the ruling in Brown I.
The right of parents to disagree with decisions made by the school system on those issues
The last act that will be reviewed is the Education Act of 1880, which made school compulsory for all children between the ages of five and ten. Even though the Act made attendance mandatory for children in this age group, only eighty-two percent of children were attending school by the early 1890s. Many children continued to work as their families desperately depended on their incomes to order to make ends meet.
The school appealed this decision and brought it to the Supreme Court to argue their case on October 12th 1977. The Supreme Court upheld the California Supreme Court's decision with a 5-4 vote. The Court also ruled that the special-admissions program constituted reverse discrimination and was therefore illegal. The Court also said that schools could continue to look at race as a factor when accepting applicants, but they could not set up a quota system or look at race as the only deciding factor.
Abington v. Schempp was an important case regarding the establishment of religion in American schools. Until the late twentieth century, most children were sent to schools which had some sort of religious instruction in their day. The schools taught the morals, values, and beliefs of Christianity in addition to their everyday curriculum. However, as some people began to drift away from Christianity, parents believed this was not fair to the kids and justifiable by the government. They thought public schools should not be affiliated with religion to ensure the freedom of all of the families who send students there. Such is the situation with the 1963 Supreme Court case Abington v. Schempp.
Board of Education was a United States Supreme Court case in 1954 that the court declared state laws to establish separate public schools for black segregated public schools to be unconstitutional. Brown v. Board of Education was filed against the Topeka, Kansas school board by plaintiff Oliver Brown, parent of one of the children that access was denied to Topeka’s none colored schools. Brown claimed that Topeka 's racial segregation violated the Constitution 's Equal Protection Clause because, the city 's black and white schools were not equal to each other. However, the court dismissed and claimed and clarified that segregated public schools were "substantially" equal enough to be constitutional under the Plessy doctrine. After hearing what the court had said to Brown he decided to appeal the Supreme Court. When Chief Justice Earl Warren stepped in the court spoke in an unanimous decision written by Warren himself stating that, racial segregation of children in public schools violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which states that "no state shall make or enforce any law which shall ... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." Also congress noticed that the Amendment did not prohibit integration and that the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees equal education to both black and white students. Since the supreme court noticed this issue they had to focus on racial equality and galvanized and developed civil
Did the state’s compulsory education n laws, which requires child’s attendance until age 16, infringe upon the parents’ First Amendment rights by criminalizing the parents who refused to send their children to school for religious reasons?
Pierce v. Society of Sisters. 268 U.S. 510, 45 S.Ct. 571, 69 L.Ed. 1070. (1925)
Because attending school in the state was compulsory, they were forced to attend private schools, creating a financial burden for their father. The father brought a suit against the Board of Education on behalf of the children and himself. The lower Courts ruled that compelling the children to stand and salute the flag was unconstitutional. The Board of Education appealed the decision and the lower court’s ruling was overturned by the Supreme Court.
I had originally thought so poorly of the parents who weren’t sending their girls to school, but through researching both sides I came to learn why parents cannot send their girls to school. I saw the issue from
In the year of 1896, the court ruled that it was legal to have "separate but equal" schools, in the case Plessy v. Ferguson. Thurgood Marshall, the main lawyer for NAACP decided he was going to challenge this. To do this he used 7 year- old Linda Brown's case. This African American girl was not allowed to attend an all- white school just down the street, rather than one across town. After that, the Brown family asked the court to let her go to the nearby school but sadly lost. Thurgood took little Linda's case all the way to the Supreme Court. They argued saying, that under segregation, schools provided for African Americans were not- and could not be- equal to white schools. On May 17 in the year of 1954, the court gave its ruling, Furthermore,
The Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled that segregation of schools is legal under the constitution. Linda Brown was black girl in the third grade and her father wanted to enroll her into an all black school. Her father tried to enroll her but the principal refused. Her father got really angry so he went to the Supreme Court. On May 17, 1954, the Supreme Court said, “ Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal. Therefore, we hold the ...
Remy, Richard C., Gary E. Clayton, and John J. Patrick. "Supreme Court Cases." Civics Today. Columbus, Ohio: Glencoe, 2008. 796. Print.
Pierce v. Society of Sisters of the Holy Names of Jesus and Mary 268 U.S. 510
The issue of equality in education is not a new problem. In 1787, our federal government required all territories petitioning for statehood to provide free education for all citizens. As part of this requirement, every state constitution included, “an education clause, which typically called for a “thorough and efficient” or “uniform” system of public schools” (School Funding 6). Despite this requirement, a “uniform” system of schools has yet to be achieved in this country for a variety of reasons, many of which I will discuss later on. During the early part of th...