Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM


Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.


Epperson vs Arkansas

No description

Mya Finfrock

on 30 January 2015

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Epperson vs Arkansas

Teacher Rebels against Arkansas Law
By Mya Finfrock and Samantha Kurniskie
The Outcome?
People were once allowed to study human evolution!
why was it called into question and is their still doubts?
It was called into question because someone defied that law and thought it should be revoked. They're are probably still some doubts and opinions from others out there.
People in the case
The Chief Justice: Earl Warren
Associate Justices: Hugo Black, William O. Douglas,
John. M. Harlan II,
William Jr. Brenan, Jr,
Potter Stewart,
Byron White,
Abe Fortas, Thurgood Marshall
Witnesess: Little Rock, the science teacher who tried to eliminate that law
Epperson v. Arkansas, 393 U.S. 97 (1968), was a United States Supreme Court case that invalidated an Arkansas statute that prohibited the teaching of human evolution in the public schools. The Court held that the First Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits a state from requiring, in the words of the majority opinion, "that teaching and learning must be tailored to the principles or prohibitions of any religious sect or dogma." The Supreme Court declared the Arkansas statute unconstitutional because it violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. After this decision, some jurisdictions passed laws that required the teaching of creation science alongside evolution when evolution was taught. These were also ruled unconstitutional by the Court in the 1987 case Edwards v. Aguillard.
Susan Epperson, a teacher in Little rock, Arkansas, defied the law of not studying human evolution. She wasn't alone, and there was a vote. From the concluding evidence there was a vote in trials. 9 votes had agreed with Epperson, while none voted against it.
Are opinions
Samantha's: I would've sided with Epperson to study human evolution! We should learn where we originally came from.

Mya's: I agree with her. We should have rights with what we learn, especially if it's our history. Example, we should know what happened in wars, history before us, and the world.
Image: Susan Epperson
Went against her state for the teacing of human evolution to be revoked.
Image: Supreme court that held whether it would be made a law or not
Image: Teaching evolution on the news
Image: The Verdict or 'story'
Image: The school Susan Epperson taught students at
Video: Epperson vs Arkansas
Full transcript