Introducing
Your new presentation assistant.
Refine, enhance, and tailor your content, source relevant images, and edit visuals quicker than ever before.
Trending searches
Justice Douglas dissented because he feared that the children of the Amish would suffer. "If a child is harnessed to the Amish way of life by those in authority over him, and if his education is cut off, his entire life may be stunted and deformed. The child, therefore, should be given an opportunity to be heard before the State gives the exemption honored today."
Jonas Yoder and Wallace Miller, both members of the Old Order Amish religion, and Adin Yutzy, a member of the Conservative Amish Mennonite Church, were prosecuted under a Wisconsin law that required all children to attend public schools until age 16. The three parents refused to send their children to such schools after the eighth grade, arguing that high school attendance was contrary to their religious beliefs. After the state ruled that it was in the best interest of the students to attend a public high school. Yoder decided to petition the Supreme Court after the Wisconsin state case ruling.
Only Justice Douglas, dissenting in part, voted against the 6–1 majority opinion written by Chief Justice Burger. The Court held "with the Supreme Court of Wisconsin, that the First and Fourteenth Amendments prevent the State from compelling the Amish to cause their children to attend formal high school to age 16."
The decision in Wisconsin v. Yoder brought together two areas of legal interpretation: parental control over education and the free exercise of religion. Between 1923 and 1927 a series of Supreme Court decisions established parents' constitutional right to exert control over their children's education, though strictly in a secular context. Yoder introduced a religious dimension to that debate. Yoder also contributed to the Court's long-standing effort to interpret the Free Exercise Clause. In 1972, Wisconsin v. Yoder elaborated on the Sherbert decision, developing the three-part balancing test. Yoder renounced the belief-action doctrine of previous rulings.
I agree with the Court Decision. I believe that people have the right to exercise their religion in the way they want to as long it does not bring harm or destruction to others. The students in the Amish community will be not be disadvantaged because they are still being educated just not in a public school environment. They will be learning about things that are essential to their community and religion.
If the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Wisconsin, it could limit the freedom and exercise of religion mentioned in the first amendment. It could dismiss other religious minorities from being heard in the Supreme Court.
The case centered on the 1st and 14th amendments, specifically on the incorporation of the Free Exercise Clause into State constitutions.
The court based its decision on their interpretation of the first amendment. The majority opinion emphasized the unique and pervasive nature of the Amish religion in rendering its decision. In an extensive inquiry into Amish religious beliefs and practices, the Court found that in an Amish community, religion, culture and daily life proved inseparable. Removing a child from his or her community for several hours a day thus would seriously undermine religious beliefs. The Court also discussed what it saw as the unbroken historical tradition of the Amish way of life, its isolation, and its rejection of modern conveniences and values. The majority opinion felt that the home-based education provided by the Amish beyond the eighth grade sufficiently prepared their children to function within and contribute to Amish society. The Court even went so far as to say that forcing these parents to send their children to high school threatened the very viability of the Amish religion and way of life.
As Thomas Jefferson pointed out, some degree of education is necessary to prepare citizens to participate effectively and intelligently in our open political system. To accept the Amish position is to accept ignorance. It is the State's duty to protect children from ignorance. Additional years of compulsory high school education would aid any Amish child who chose to leave the community and enter the larger world.
If the Old Order Amish sent their children to the public school, "they would not only expose themselves to the danger of the censure of the church community, but…endanger their own salvation and that of their children." Forcing them to do so would clearly violate their free exercise rights. The Wisconsin Supreme Court ruling should be allowed to stand.