Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes
www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Published/111448.P.pdf A South Carolina school district set up a Zorach-like release time program for religious instruction at an unaccedited religious school. Then it decided to give the participating students *academic credit* for their purely religious studies in the release-time program. The Fourth Circuit upholds this program, on the theory that it's no different from recognizing credits from a private, accredited religious school when a student transfers to the public school. But in that latter case (or in the related context of giving credit for home-schooling), the credits presumably are awarded based upon the showing or the presumption that they reflect the student's completion of the necessary *secular* curriculum. Here, the education in question is specifically religious in nature (that's the point, and there's no indication in the opinion of any secular content). That is to say, the credit is being offered for the religious education simplicitur. Is this holding defensible? On Mirror of Justice, Rick Garnett calls it welcome, but it's not obvious to me why that might be so. ___ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
RE: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes
One conceivable difficulty is the entanglement problem. When a student transfers in to public school from a religious school, there may be several different sorts of courses that the student will have taken which may combine, in various degrees, religious and secular components. I'm not sure I agree with Marty that it is always the case that the transferred credits are awarded solely for purely secular courses. Segregating out the secular and religious components can be difficult. And getting the school district involved in determining which are purely secular, and which are mixed, and which are purely religious, might risk excessive entanglement. Having said that, I agree that awarding credits for, e.g., CCD class or equivalent education is problematic. Marc From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marty Lederman Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2012 9:58 AM To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics Subject: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Published/111448.P.pdfhttp://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Published/111448.P.pdf A South Carolina school district set up a Zorach-like release time program for religious instruction at an unaccedited religious school. Then it decided to give the participating students academic credit for their purely religious studies in the release-time program. The Fourth Circuit upholds this program, on the theory that it's no different from recognizing credits from a private, accredited religious school when a student transfers to the public school. But in that latter case (or in the related context of giving credit for home-schooling), the credits presumably are awarded based upon the showing or the presumption that they reflect the student's completion of the necessary secular curriculum. Here, the education in question is specifically religious in nature (that's the point, and there's no indication in the opinion of any secular content). That is to say, the credit is being offered for the religious education simplicitur. Is this holding defensible? On Mirror of Justice, Rick Garnett calls it welcome, but it's not obvious to me why that might be so. ___ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
Re: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes
I generally agree, Marc. The public school in the hypothetical transfer case, partly in order to avoid entanglement (especially when dealing with classes that might teach secular subjects with some degree of religious perspective), basically presumes that the cumulative credits received from the private school reflect the fact that the accredited school has taught the student the relevant secular material. But here, the whole point of the release time is for the student to be able to receive what the statute expressly refers to as religious instruction -- in this case, a Christian worldview class; and there's no hint in the opinion that the class is supposed to provide the student with any of the secular education she is missing during the release time. Therefore I'm with you -- it's problematic; indeed, strikes me as flatly unconstitutional. On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 10:13 AM, Marc DeGirolami marc.degirol...@stjohns.edu wrote: One conceivable difficulty is the entanglement problem. When a student transfers in to public school from a religious school, there may be several different sorts of courses that the student will have taken which may combine, in various degrees, “religious” and “secular” components. I’m not sure I agree with Marty that it is always the case that the transferred credits are awarded solely for purely secular courses. Segregating out the secular and religious components can be difficult. And getting the school district involved in determining which are purely secular, and which are mixed, and which are purely religious, might risk excessive entanglement.* *** ** ** Having said that, I agree that awarding credits for, e.g., CCD class or equivalent education is problematic. ** ** Marc ** ** *From:* religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] *On Behalf Of *Marty Lederman *Sent:* Saturday, June 30, 2012 9:58 AM *To:* Law Religion issues for Law Academics *Subject:* Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes ** ** www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Published/111448.P.pdf A South Carolina school district set up a Zorach-like release time program for religious instruction at an unaccedited religious school. Then it decided to give the participating students *academic credit* for their purely religious studies in the release-time program. The Fourth Circuit upholds this program, on the theory that it's no different from recognizing credits from a private, accredited religious school when a student transfers to the public school. But in that latter case (or in the related context of giving credit for home-schooling), the credits presumably are awarded based upon the showing or the presumption that they reflect the student's completion of the necessary *secular* curriculum. Here, the education in question is specifically religious in nature (that's the point, and there's no indication in the opinion of any secular content). That is to say, the credit is being offered for the religious education simplicitur. Is this holding defensible? On Mirror of Justice, Rick Garnett calls it welcome, but it's not obvious to me why that might be so. ___ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others. ___ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
RE: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes
Thanks, Marty. I think we are agreeing on the basics, but I guess I am less certain about the nature of the course at issue here. You are right that the course is described as a Christian Worldview class, but the content is never really discussed. As you point out, a different, accredited, religious school was asked to review the curricular heft of the course and here is what the court says about that: Following the School District's preference, Spartanburg Bible School entered into an arrangement with Oakbrook Preparatory School, an accredited private Christian school, by which Spartanburg Bible School could submit its grades through Oakbrook to Spartanburg High School. Under the arrangement, Oakbrook agreed to review and monitor Spartanburg Bible School's curriculum, its teacher qualifications, and educational objectives, and to award course credit and grades given by the Bible School before transferring them to Spartanburg High School. In carrying out the arrangement, Oakbrook reviewed syllabi, spoke with instructors, suggested minor curricular adjustments, and satisfied itself that the Spartanburg Bible School course was academically rigorous. The finding by the accredited religious school that the program offered by SBS was academically rigorous strikes me as susceptible of a few possible readings, at least some of which suggest a mixture of secular and religious components. Part of the difficulty is, of course, in maintaining the conceptual purity of these categories. Marc From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marty Lederman Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2012 10:26 AM To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics Subject: Re: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes I generally agree, Marc. The public school in the hypothetical transfer case, partly in order to avoid entanglement (especially when dealing with classes that might teach secular subjects with some degree of religious perspective), basically presumes that the cumulative credits received from the private school reflect the fact that the accredited school has taught the student the relevant secular material. But here, the whole point of the release time is for the student to be able to receive what the statute expressly refers to as religious instruction -- in this case, a Christian worldview class; and there's no hint in the opinion that the class is supposed to provide the student with any of the secular education she is missing during the release time. Therefore I'm with you -- it's problematic; indeed, strikes me as flatly unconstitutional. On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 10:13 AM, Marc DeGirolami marc.degirol...@stjohns.edumailto:marc.degirol...@stjohns.edu wrote: One conceivable difficulty is the entanglement problem. When a student transfers in to public school from a religious school, there may be several different sorts of courses that the student will have taken which may combine, in various degrees, religious and secular components. I'm not sure I agree with Marty that it is always the case that the transferred credits are awarded solely for purely secular courses. Segregating out the secular and religious components can be difficult. And getting the school district involved in determining which are purely secular, and which are mixed, and which are purely religious, might risk excessive entanglement. Having said that, I agree that awarding credits for, e.g., CCD class or equivalent education is problematic. Marc From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edumailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edumailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marty Lederman Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2012 9:58 AM To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics Subject: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Published/111448.P.pdfhttp://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Published/111448.P.pdf A South Carolina school district set up a Zorach-like release time program for religious instruction at an unaccedited religious school. Then it decided to give the participating students academic credit for their purely religious studies in the release-time program. The Fourth Circuit upholds this program, on the theory that it's no different from recognizing credits from a private, accredited religious school when a student transfers to the public school. But in that latter case (or in the related context of giving credit for home-schooling), the credits presumably are awarded based upon the showing or the presumption that they reflect the student's completion of the necessary secular curriculum. Here, the education in question is specifically religious in nature (that's the point, and there's no indication in the opinion of any secular content). That is to say, the credit is being offered for the religious education
Re: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes
Rick, The statute says that the school district must use secular criteria to determine whether the release time education qualifies for credits, but those criteria have nothing to do with fulfillment of any of the secular educational objectives of the school (they include the number of hours of instruction; a syllabus that reflects course requirements; a method of assessment used by the religious school teachers; and whether the teachers are certified). The School District here, for admirable nonentanglement reasons, entered into an arrangement with Oakbrook Preparatory School, an accredited private Christian school, by which Spartanburg Bible School could submit its grades through Oakbrook to Spartanburg High School. Under the arrangement, Oakbrook agreed to review and monitor Spar- tanburg Bible School’s curriculum, its teacher qualifications, and educational objectives, and to award course credit and grades given by the Bible School before transferring them to Spartanburg High School. In carrying out the arrangement, Oakbrook reviewed syllabi, spoke with instructors, suggested minor curricular adjustments, and satisfied itself that the Spar- tanburg Bible School course was academically rigorous. To my mind, this delegation raises a serious Larkin problem. But that aside, the fact that the accredited school is an intermediary that transfers the grades based on an assessment that the *religious *course was academically rigorous does not cure the problem, which is that this education is designed to be religious in nature, and not to advance any of the secular objectives of the public schools. You quote with apparent approval Judge Niemeyer's governing principle that private religious education is an integral part of the American school system. But that stated principle is the problem, not a virtue. Providing families with the option of achieving the society's *secular *educational objectives at a private school of their choice, religious or secular, is a governing principle of the American school system. (And securing the freedom of families to provide or obtain a private religious education *outside *the American school system is surely a governing principle of our constitutional order (Meyer, Pierce, etc.).) But religious education as such not only is not an integral part of the American school system -- as a constitutional matter, it can't be part of that system at all. On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 10:29 AM, Rick Garnett rgarn...@nd.edu wrote: Dear Marty, In this case, if I am reading the opinion correctly, the credits in question are coming from Oakbrook Preparatory School, an accredited private Christian school. In my view, the decision is welcome because -- as Marc says, below -- I think it would be the wrong approach to say that, when a student transfers from a non-state school to a state school, he or she may only receive credit for courses with the requisite secular content. As Judge Niemeyer wrote: Also important to our conclusion is the governing principle that private religious education is an integral part of the American school system. Indeed, States are constitutionally obligated to allow children and parents to choose whether to fulfill their compulsory education obligations by attending a secular public school or a religious private school. *See Pierce v. Soc’y of Sisters *, 268 U.S. 510, 534-35 (1925). It would be strange and unfair to penalize such students when they attempt to transfer into the public school system by refusing to honor the grades they earned in their religious courses, potentially preventing them from graduating on schedule with their public school peers. Far from establishing a state religion, the acceptance of transfer credits (including religious credits) by public schools sensibly *accommodates *the genuine choice among options public and private, secular and religious. * Zelman v. Simmons-Harris *, 536 U.S. 639, 662 (2002) (upholding an Ohio voucher initiative for this reason). The court was careful to note that the school district had not encouraged students to participate or inappropriately endorsed religion. Like Marc, I can imagine some abuses, and hard cases, but this one does not seem (to me) to be one. Best, Rick Richard W. Garnett Professor of Law Associate Dean Notre Dame Law School P.O. Box 780 Notre Dame, IN 46556-0780 574-631-6981 (office) 574-631-4197 (fax) -- *From:* religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [ religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marc DeGirolami [ marc.degirol...@stjohns.edu] *Sent:* Saturday, June 30, 2012 10:13 AM *To:* Law Religion issues for Law Academics *Subject:* RE: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes One conceivable difficulty is the entanglement problem. When a student transfers in to public school from a religious school, there may be several different sorts
Re: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes
) -- *From:* religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [ religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marc DeGirolami [ marc.degirol...@stjohns.edu] *Sent:* Saturday, June 30, 2012 10:13 AM *To:* Law Religion issues for Law Academics *Subject:* RE: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes One conceivable difficulty is the entanglement problem. When a student transfers in to public school from a religious school, there may be several different sorts of courses that the student will have taken which may combine, in various degrees, “religious” and “secular” components. I’m not sure I agree with Marty that it is always the case that the transferred credits are awarded solely for purely secular courses. Segregating out the secular and religious components can be difficult. And getting the school district involved in determining which are purely secular, and which are mixed, and which are purely religious, might risk excessive entanglement. Having said that, I agree that awarding credits for, e.g., CCD class or equivalent education is problematic. Marc *From:* religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] *On Behalf Of *Marty Lederman *Sent:* Saturday, June 30, 2012 9:58 AM *To:* Law Religion issues for Law Academics *Subject:* Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Published/111448.P.pdf A South Carolina school district set up a Zorach-like release time program for religious instruction at an unaccedited religious school. Then it decided to give the participating students *academic credit* for their purely religious studies in the release-time program. The Fourth Circuit upholds this program, on the theory that it's no different from recognizing credits from a private, accredited religious school when a student transfers to the public school. But in that latter case (or in the related context of giving credit for home-schooling), the credits presumably are awarded based upon the showing or the presumption that they reflect the student's completion of the necessary *secular* curriculum. Here, the education in question is specifically religious in nature (that's the point, and there's no indication in the opinion of any secular content). That is to say, the credit is being offered for the religious education simplicitur. Is this holding defensible? On Mirror of Justice, Rick Garnett calls it welcome, but it's not obvious to me why that might be so. ___ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others. ___ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
Re: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes
...@lists.ucla.edumailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marc DeGirolami [marc.degirol...@stjohns.edumailto:marc.degirol...@stjohns.edu] Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2012 10:13 AM To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics Subject: RE: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes One conceivable difficulty is the entanglement problem. When a student transfers in to public school from a religious school, there may be several different sorts of courses that the student will have taken which may combine, in various degrees, “religious” and “secular” components. I’m not sure I agree with Marty that it is always the case that the transferred credits are awarded solely for purely secular courses. Segregating out the secular and religious components can be difficult. And getting the school district involved in determining which are purely secular, and which are mixed, and which are purely religious, might risk excessive entanglement. Having said that, I agree that awarding credits for, e.g., CCD class or equivalent education is problematic. Marc From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edumailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edumailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marty Lederman Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2012 9:58 AM To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics Subject: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Published/111448.P.pdfhttp://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Published/111448.P.pdf A South Carolina school district set up a Zorach-like release time program for religious instruction at an unaccedited religious school. Then it decided to give the participating students academic credit for their purely religious studies in the release-time program. The Fourth Circuit upholds this program, on the theory that it's no different from recognizing credits from a private, accredited religious school when a student transfers to the public school. But in that latter case (or in the related context of giving credit for home-schooling), the credits presumably are awarded based upon the showing or the presumption that they reflect the student's completion of the necessary secular curriculum. Here, the education in question is specifically religious in nature (that's the point, and there's no indication in the opinion of any secular content). That is to say, the credit is being offered for the religious education simplicitur. Is this holding defensible? On Mirror of Justice, Rick Garnett calls it welcome, but it's not obvious to me why that might be so. ___ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edumailto:Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others. ___ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edumailto:Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others. ___ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
Re: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes
) to be one. Best, Rick Richard W. Garnett Professor of Law Associate Dean Notre Dame Law School P.O. Box 780 Notre Dame, IN 46556-0780 574-631-6981 (office) 574-631-4197 (fax) -- *From:* religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [ religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marc DeGirolami [ marc.degirol...@stjohns.edu] *Sent:* Saturday, June 30, 2012 10:13 AM *To:* Law Religion issues for Law Academics *Subject:* RE: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes One conceivable difficulty is the entanglement problem. When a student transfers in to public school from a religious school, there may be several different sorts of courses that the student will have taken which may combine, in various degrees, “religious” and “secular” components. I’m not sure I agree with Marty that it is always the case that the transferred credits are awarded solely for purely secular courses. Segregating out the secular and religious components can be difficult. And getting the school district involved in determining which are purely secular, and which are mixed, and which are purely religious, might risk excessive entanglement. Having said that, I agree that awarding credits for, e.g., CCD class or equivalent education is problematic. Marc *From:* religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] *On Behalf Of *Marty Lederman *Sent:* Saturday, June 30, 2012 9:58 AM *To:* Law Religion issues for Law Academics *Subject:* Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Published/111448.P.pdf A South Carolina school district set up a Zorach-like release time program for religious instruction at an unaccedited religious school. Then it decided to give the participating students *academic credit* for their purely religious studies in the release-time program. The Fourth Circuit upholds this program, on the theory that it's no different from recognizing credits from a private, accredited religious school when a student transfers to the public school. But in that latter case (or in the related context of giving credit for home-schooling), the credits presumably are awarded based upon the showing or the presumption that they reflect the student's completion of the necessary *secular* curriculum. Here, the education in question is specifically religious in nature (that's the point, and there's no indication in the opinion of any secular content). That is to say, the credit is being offered for the religious education simplicitur. Is this holding defensible? On Mirror of Justice, Rick Garnett calls it welcome, but it's not obvious to me why that might be so. ___ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others. ___ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
Re: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes
establishing a state religion, the acceptance of transfer credits (including religious credits) by public schools sensibly accommodates the genuine choice among options public and private, secular and religious. Zelman v. Simmons-Harris , 536 U.S. 639, 662 (2002) (upholding an Ohio voucher initiative for this reason). The court was careful to note that the school district had not encouraged students to participate or inappropriately endorsed religion. Like Marc, I can imagine some abuses, and hard cases, but this one does not seem (to me) to be one. Best, Rick Richard W. Garnett Professor of Law Associate Dean Notre Dame Law School P.O. Box 780 Notre Dame, IN 46556-0780 574-631-6981tel:574-631-6981 (office) 574-631-4197tel:574-631-4197 (fax) From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edumailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edumailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marc DeGirolami [marc.degirol...@stjohns.edumailto:marc.degirol...@stjohns.edu] Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2012 10:13 AM To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics Subject: RE: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes One conceivable difficulty is the entanglement problem. When a student transfers in to public school from a religious school, there may be several different sorts of courses that the student will have taken which may combine, in various degrees, “religious” and “secular” components. I’m not sure I agree with Marty that it is always the case that the transferred credits are awarded solely for purely secular courses. Segregating out the secular and religious components can be difficult. And getting the school district involved in determining which are purely secular, and which are mixed, and which are purely religious, might risk excessive entanglement. Having said that, I agree that awarding credits for, e.g., CCD class or equivalent education is problematic. Marc From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edumailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edumailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marty Lederman Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2012 9:58 AM To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics Subject: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Published/111448.P.pdfhttp://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Published/111448.P.pdf A South Carolina school district set up a Zorach-like release time program for religious instruction at an unaccedited religious school. Then it decided to give the participating students academic credit for their purely religious studies in the release-time program. The Fourth Circuit upholds this program, on the theory that it's no different from recognizing credits from a private, accredited religious school when a student transfers to the public school. But in that latter case (or in the related context of giving credit for home-schooling), the credits presumably are awarded based upon the showing or the presumption that they reflect the student's completion of the necessary secular curriculum. Here, the education in question is specifically religious in nature (that's the point, and there's no indication in the opinion of any secular content). That is to say, the credit is being offered for the religious education simplicitur. Is this holding defensible? On Mirror of Justice, Rick Garnett calls it welcome, but it's not obvious to me why that might be so. ___ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edumailto:Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others. ___ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edumailto:Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others. ___ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can
RE: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes
This strikes me as simply another example of the willingness of courts to undermine public education and educational standards, while at the same undermining any separation of Church and State. The Zorach concept was to allow release time, which was bad enough. When I was in school we basically did nothing every Wed. afternoon because all the Catholic kids left for church school. I was one of two Jewish kids in my school and there were two Greek Orthodox kids. We went to Hebrew school twice a week after the school day, not on release time; the Orthodox kids went to Greek school in the same way. We could never figure out why that system worked that way. I still can't. As a policy matter, this is not welcoming to use Rick's concept, but quite the opposite. It separates school children out, it undermines the education of everyone, and leaves less time in the school day for general education. These issues remind me of President Kennedy's press conference response to the school prayer decision. Asked about the decision (which came down the day of one of his scheduled press conferences), he simply said that parents should pray at home with their children before they leave for school. Similarly, religious education ought to be on the non-school time. Giving credit for religious education outside of school makes no pedagogic sense at all. And it should raise all sorts of entanglement questions, since the school board ought to be examining the credentials of the teachers, the texts, the pedagogy. Does anyone really want that in their religious education? Paul Finkelman President William McKinley Distinguished Professor of Law Albany Law School 80 New Scotland Avenue Albany, NY 12208 518-445-3386 (p) 518-445-3363 (f) paul.finkel...@albanylaw.edumailto:paul.finkel...@albanylaw.edu www.paulfinkelman.comhttp://www.paulfinkelman.com From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marty Lederman Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2012 9:58 AM To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics Subject: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Published/111448.P.pdfhttp://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Published/111448.P.pdf A South Carolina school district set up a Zorach-like release time program for religious instruction at an unaccedited religious school. Then it decided to give the participating students academic credit for their purely religious studies in the release-time program. The Fourth Circuit upholds this program, on the theory that it's no different from recognizing credits from a private, accredited religious school when a student transfers to the public school. But in that latter case (or in the related context of giving credit for home-schooling), the credits presumably are awarded based upon the showing or the presumption that they reflect the student's completion of the necessary secular curriculum. Here, the education in question is specifically religious in nature (that's the point, and there's no indication in the opinion of any secular content). That is to say, the credit is being offered for the religious education simplicitur. Is this holding defensible? On Mirror of Justice, Rick Garnett calls it welcome, but it's not obvious to me why that might be so. ___ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
RE: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes
I guess a similar sort of question is: what is the difference between a single class with integrated secular and religious components, and an entire program of study with integrated secular and religious components. Is that difference - a difference of quantity more than of quality - of constitutional significance? I'm uncertain about this, but I have difficulty seeing why it should be, without reference to the specifics of what is being taught, and in which way, and to what end. At first blush, it seems to me that an entire course of study, comprising many more sorts of 'mixed' courses, might be more constitutionally problematic if what we are concerned with from a constitutional perspective is ensuring that the secular authority does not credit any education with (predominantly? many?) religious features. I guess what I thought problematic about crediting Sunday school classes is that their purpose and curriculum is (at least in my own experience, though I recognize that this will vary) overwhelmingly devotional. The curriculum and purpose of most accredited religious schools is mixed. And the nature of the course in the 4th Circuit case is unclear. Marc From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marty Lederman Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2012 10:55 AM To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics Subject: Re: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes To put the question another way: Like many of you, I received my religious education after school, and on weekends. It was academically rigorous, I can assure you. I even learned some valuable secular skills, such as speaking another language. Would it have been constitutional for my public school to award me credits for those late afternoon and Sunday classes? On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 10:47 AM, Marty Lederman lederman.ma...@gmail.commailto:lederman.ma...@gmail.com wrote: Rick, The statute says that the school district must use secular criteria to determine whether the release time education qualifies for credits, but those criteria have nothing to do with fulfillment of any of the secular educational objectives of the school (they include the number of hours of instruction; a syllabus that reflects course requirements; a method of assessment used by the religious school teachers; and whether the teachers are certified). The School District here, for admirable nonentanglement reasons, entered into an arrangement with Oakbrook Preparatory School, an accredited private Christian school, by which Spartanburg Bible School could submit its grades through Oakbrook to Spartanburg High School. Under the arrangement, Oakbrook agreed to review and monitor Spar- tanburg Bible School's curriculum, its teacher qualifications, and educational objectives, and to award course credit and grades given by the Bible School before transferring them to Spartanburg High School. In carrying out the arrangement, Oakbrook reviewed syllabi, spoke with instructors, suggested minor curricular adjustments, and satisfied itself that the Spar- tanburg Bible School course was academically rigorous. To my mind, this delegation raises a serious Larkin problem. But that aside, the fact that the accredited school is an intermediary that transfers the grades based on an assessment that the religious course was academically rigorous does not cure the problem, which is that this education is designed to be religious in nature, and not to advance any of the secular objectives of the public schools. You quote with apparent approval Judge Niemeyer's governing principle that private religious education is an integral part of the American school system. But that stated principle is the problem, not a virtue. Providing families with the option of achieving the society's secular educational objectives at a private school of their choice, religious or secular, is a governing principle of the American school system. (And securing the freedom of families to provide or obtain a private religious education outside the American school system is surely a governing principle of our constitutional order (Meyer, Pierce, etc.).) But religious education as such not only is not an integral part of the American school system -- as a constitutional matter, it can't be part of that system at all. On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 10:29 AM, Rick Garnett rgarn...@nd.edumailto:rgarn...@nd.edu wrote: Dear Marty, In this case, if I am reading the opinion correctly, the credits in question are coming from Oakbrook Preparatory School, an accredited private Christian school. In my view, the decision is welcome because -- as Marc says, below -- I think it would be the wrong approach to say that, when a student transfers from a non-state school to a state school, he or she may only receive credit for courses with the requisite secular content. As Judge Niemeyer wrote: Also important
RE: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes
I'm having trouble seeing just what the awarding of credit means here and how it's problematic that a public school gives students credit for time sitting in a different classroom. There is no constitutional obligation on a public school to provide any particular level or amount or quality of instruction. The awarding of a high school diploma is not a conferring of a public right or license or anything of the sort. I believe that religious schools include religion classes in their curriculum as part of the number of hours of instruction required for graduation under their accrediting bodies' standards and presumably under whatever Education Code may apply. If that practice sufficiently meets societal needs, then I don't understand why (as a matter of constitutional law) the public schools should have to drag in students to sit for additional public school hours when the students have a release time religious educational experience. Consider this hypo: A public school district has relatively few specified high school graduation requirements (only two years of English, two years of math, etc.), but it does require that students be in school from 8am to 3pm. The school district sets up a release time program for religious instruction from 2-3pm. Must the school district now require students who are in the release time program to return to the public school and sit through a study hall period (or other class) for an additional hour, so that they have seven hours on the public school campus? If not, then the release time students are in effect being given credit for their release time educational experience. Mark S. Scarberry Professor of Law Pepperdine Univ. School of Law ___ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
RE: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes
Mark: School require a certain number of course credits, just like colleges; you need to pass a specified number of classes; they are not all requirement. But, if you allow theology or bible study or voodoo from a non-accredited teacher and school, with no outside supervision, you are essentially limiting the kind of education the children get; you are devaluing the diploma. Your scenario misses the point that the kids can go to religious school after 3:00 and on weekends, like many of us did. Futhermore, by taking the children out of school you harm education for everyone else because the parents of the missing students will complain that their kids are not getting to take certain classes. If was nice to have nothing to do Wed. afternoon because too many kids were in church school, but think of all the hours of learning we missed. Paul Finkelman President William McKinley Distinguished Professor of Law Albany Law School 80 New Scotland Avenue Albany, NY 12208 518-445-3386 (p) 518-445-3363 (f) paul.finkel...@albanylaw.edumailto:paul.finkel...@albanylaw.edu www.paulfinkelman.comhttp://www.paulfinkelman.com From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Scarberry, Mark Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2012 12:13 PM To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics Subject: RE: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes I'm having trouble seeing just what the awarding of credit means here and how it's problematic that a public school gives students credit for time sitting in a different classroom. There is no constitutional obligation on a public school to provide any particular level or amount or quality of instruction. The awarding of a high school diploma is not a conferring of a public right or license or anything of the sort. I believe that religious schools include religion classes in their curriculum as part of the number of hours of instruction required for graduation under their accrediting bodies' standards and presumably under whatever Education Code may apply. If that practice sufficiently meets societal needs, then I don't understand why (as a matter of constitutional law) the public schools should have to drag in students to sit for additional public school hours when the students have a release time religious educational experience. Consider this hypo: A public school district has relatively few specified high school graduation requirements (only two years of English, two years of math, etc.), but it does require that students be in school from 8am to 3pm. The school district sets up a release time program for religious instruction from 2-3pm. Must the school district now require students who are in the release time program to return to the public school and sit through a study hall period (or other class) for an additional hour, so that they have seven hours on the public school campus? If not, then the release time students are in effect being given credit for their release time educational experience. Mark S. Scarberry Professor of Law Pepperdine Univ. School of Law ___ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
Re: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes
Oh, sure. If a school counts credits for graduation purposes based on total hours spent in any school -- such that it gives credit for the student's outside courses in pottery, Pilades, drivers' education, SAT test-taking, etc. -- then of course it should not, and need not, discriminate against hours spent in religious courses. But no school does any such thing. Instead, the credits presumably must be for classes in service of the school system's pedagogic mission. On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 12:12 PM, Scarberry, Mark mark.scarbe...@pepperdine.edu wrote: I’m having trouble seeing just what the awarding of credit means here and how it’s problematic that a public school gives students “credit” for time sitting in a different classroom. There is no constitutional obligation on a public school to provide any particular level or amount or quality of instruction. The “awarding” of a high school diploma is not a conferring of a public right or license or anything of the sort. ** ** I believe that religious schools include religion classes in their curriculum as part of the number of hours of instruction required for graduation under their accrediting bodies’ standards and presumably under whatever Education Code may apply. If that practice sufficiently meets societal needs, then I don’t understand why (as a matter of constitutional law) the public schools should have to drag in students to sit for additional public school hours when the students have a release time religious educational experience. ** ** Consider this hypo: A public school district has relatively few specified high school graduation requirements (only two years of English, two years of math, etc.), but it does require that students be in school from 8am to 3pm. The school district sets up a release time program for religious instruction from 2-3pm. Must the school district now require students who are in the release time program to return to the public school and sit through a study hall period (or other class) for an additional hour, so that they have seven hours on the public school campus? If not, then the release time students are in effect being given “credit” for their release time educational experience. ** ** Mark S. Scarberry Professor of Law Pepperdine Univ. School of Law ** ** ___ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others. ___ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
Re: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes
Rick, If a public school district can award public school educational credit for two hours of purely religious release time instruction, what limiting principle constrains it from awarding ten or, for that matter, a full year's worth of public school credit for release time religious instruction? What secular objective does this program serve? To be sure a parent can opt out of the public school system and send a child to a school that teaches only religious doctrine (whether in Spartanburg, Borough Park, or Dearborn), but why does that rule also permit that parent to secure public school academic credit and a public school diploma for that instruction? The panel's misplace reliance on Lanner v. Wimmer is no answer; Lanner reaffirms Allen's authorization to insist that transfer credits cover prescribed subjects of instruction. Lanner put it this way: School authorities may inquire into the training of teachers and whether a particular course covered a subject for which credit could be granted. Such inquiry is analogous to the state's constitutional perusal of full-time private schools. Lanner affirmed the injunction insofar as it forbade academic credit for elective courses, leaving the school district free on remand to adopt religiously neutral criteria that focus on whether a release time course covers a subject for which credit could be granted. Although Lanner doesn't put release time credit off limits simply because a release time course has religious content, it reaffirms Allen's rule that, religious content aside, the subject covered be one for which a public school can grant academic credit. Public schools do not grant academic credit for instruction in toenail cutting; the reason isn't because toenail cutting has an impermissible religious purpose or because it impermissibly advances religion; it is that toenail cutting is not a subject for which public school credit can be granted irrespective of where the instruction takes place. Under the religion clauses, religious instruction cannot be a public school prescribed subject of instruction, so a public school cannot, through its release time program, selectively favor it for academic credit. There's no reason to ask whether South Carolina could award academic credit for all instruction irrespective of subject (including toenail cutting) since it does not do that; what it does is single out religious instruction for release time academic credit. Thats a far cry from accepting for transfer credits a year at St. Joseph High based on the factual judgment that St. Joseph teaches prescribed subjects of instruction. Mike Michael R. Masinter 3305 College Avenue Professor of Law Fort Lauderdale, FL 33314 Nova Southeastern University 954.262.6151 (voice) masin...@nova.edu954.262.3835 (fax) Quoting Rick Garnett rgarn...@nd.edu: Dear Marty, Credits are awarded, I assume, routinely when students transfer from, say, St Joseph High School to Thomas Jefferson High School for, say, courses in Theology. In my view, this does not raise Establishment / Larkin issues. Our disagreement, I suppose, proceeds from a different view of what the state is doing when it awards credits to students. I think, again, that Judge Niemeyer is right. Best, R Sent from my iPhone On Jun 30, 2012, at 11:13 AM, Marty Lederman lederman.ma...@gmail.commailto:lederman.ma...@gmail.com wrote: I should add that, wholly apart from whether the particular Spartanburg Bible School class was in any way, as Rick suggests, of some secular educational value (which was, I repeat, not the basis for the court's holding), the South Carolina statute at issue expressly provides that [a] school district board of trustees may award high school students no more than two elective Carnegie units for the completion of released time classes in religious instruction. That is to say, the credits are specifically and unequivocally being awarded for the religious instruction as such. ___ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
RE: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes
Setting aside the Oh, sure, for whatever meaning it may have, the same issues are raised by Zorach. If the school district may release students for religious instruction as an accommodation, must it also release students for Pilates (note the spelling and capitalization) classes, pottery classes, etc.? If a student gets release time for a religious class, or credit for a religious class, then the student should also get release time, or credit, for a philosophy or history of thought or atheism or secular humanist class. I'm not sure how broadly the net must be cast as a matter of constitutional law, but in each instance that question must be addressed. By the way, what makes an outside pottery class any less valuable than an inside pottery class? I have a very ugly coffee mug that I made in a public school 7th grade art class. I doubt that the inside class did any more for my nonexistent artistic skills in furtherance of the school district's mission than an outside class would have. Mark S. Scarberry Professor of Law Pepperdine Univ. School of Law From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marty Lederman Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2012 9:26 AM To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics Subject: Re: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes Oh, sure. If a school counts credits for graduation purposes based on total hours spent in any school -- such that it gives credit for the student's outside courses in pottery, Pilades, drivers' education, SAT test-taking, etc. -- then of course it should not, and need not, discriminate against hours spent in religious courses. But no school does any such thing. Instead, the credits presumably must be for classes in service of the school system's pedagogic mission. On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 12:12 PM, Scarberry, Mark mark.scarbe...@pepperdine.edumailto:mark.scarbe...@pepperdine.edu wrote: I'm having trouble seeing just what the awarding of credit means here and how it's problematic that a public school gives students credit for time sitting in a different classroom. There is no constitutional obligation on a public school to provide any particular level or amount or quality of instruction. The awarding of a high school diploma is not a conferring of a public right or license or anything of the sort. I believe that religious schools include religion classes in their curriculum as part of the number of hours of instruction required for graduation under their accrediting bodies' standards and presumably under whatever Education Code may apply. If that practice sufficiently meets societal needs, then I don't understand why (as a matter of constitutional law) the public schools should have to drag in students to sit for additional public school hours when the students have a release time religious educational experience. Consider this hypo: A public school district has relatively few specified high school graduation requirements (only two years of English, two years of math, etc.), but it does require that students be in school from 8am to 3pm. The school district sets up a release time program for religious instruction from 2-3pm. Must the school district now require students who are in the release time program to return to the public school and sit through a study hall period (or other class) for an additional hour, so that they have seven hours on the public school campus? If not, then the release time students are in effect being given credit for their release time educational experience. Mark S. Scarberry Professor of Law Pepperdine Univ. School of Law ___ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edumailto:Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others. ___ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
RE: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes
Zorach is a release time case; it is not an academic credit case. If the distinction between academic credit (Allen) and release time (Zorach) matters, and I think it does for reasons previously expressed, then Spartanburg is free to offer release time selectively for religious instruction (Zorach), but not to offer academic credit for it unless the religious school's course is a permissible public school subject of instruction (Allen), and, religious instruction, as distinct from the history of religion, is not a permissible subject of public school instruction. Mike Michael R. Masinter 3305 College Avenue Professor of Law Fort Lauderdale, FL 33314 Nova Southeastern University 954.262.6151 (voice) masin...@nova.edu954.262.3835 (fax) Quoting Scarberry, Mark mark.scarbe...@pepperdine.edu: Setting aside the Oh, sure, for whatever meaning it may have, the same issues are raised by Zorach. If the school district may release students for religious instruction as an accommodation, must it also release students for Pilates (note the spelling and capitalization) classes, pottery classes, etc.? If a student gets release time for a religious class, or credit for a religious class, then the student should also get release time, or credit, for a philosophy or history of thought or atheism or secular humanist class. I'm not sure how broadly the net must be cast as a matter of constitutional law, but in each instance that question must be addressed. By the way, what makes an outside pottery class any less valuable than an inside pottery class? I have a very ugly coffee mug that I made in a public school 7th grade art class. I doubt that the inside class did any more for my nonexistent artistic skills in furtherance of the school district's mission than an outside class would have. Mark S. Scarberry Professor of Law Pepperdine Univ. School of Law From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marty Lederman Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2012 9:26 AM To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics Subject: Re: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes Oh, sure. If a school counts credits for graduation purposes based on total hours spent in any school -- such that it gives credit for the student's outside courses in pottery, Pilades, drivers' education, SAT test-taking, etc. -- then of course it should not, and need not, discriminate against hours spent in religious courses. But no school does any such thing. Instead, the credits presumably must be for classes in service of the school system's pedagogic mission. On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 12:12 PM, Scarberry, Mark mark.scarbe...@pepperdine.edumailto:mark.scarbe...@pepperdine.edu wrote: I'm having trouble seeing just what the awarding of credit means here and how it's problematic that a public school gives students credit for time sitting in a different classroom. There is no constitutional obligation on a public school to provide any particular level or amount or quality of instruction. The awarding of a high school diploma is not a conferring of a public right or license or anything of the sort. I believe that religious schools include religion classes in their curriculum as part of the number of hours of instruction required for graduation under their accrediting bodies' standards and presumably under whatever Education Code may apply. If that practice sufficiently meets societal needs, then I don't understand why (as a matter of constitutional law) the public schools should have to drag in students to sit for additional public school hours when the students have a release time religious educational experience. Consider this hypo: A public school district has relatively few specified high school graduation requirements (only two years of English, two years of math, etc.), but it does require that students be in school from 8am to 3pm. The school district sets up a release time program for religious instruction from 2-3pm. Must the school district now require students who are in the release time program to return to the public school and sit through a study hall period (or other class) for an additional hour, so that they have seven hours on the public school campus? If not, then the release time students are in effect being given credit for their release time educational experience. Mark S. Scarberry Professor of Law Pepperdine Univ. School of Law ___ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edumailto:Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent
Re: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes
of Sisters , 268 U.S. 510, 534-35 (1925). It would be strange and unfair to penalize such students when they attempt to transfer into the public school system by refusing to honor the grades they earned in their religious courses, potentially preventing them from graduating on schedule with their public school peers. Far from establishing a state religion, the acceptance of transfer credits (including religious credits) by public schools sensibly accommodates the genuine choice among options public and private, secular and religious. Zelman v. Simmons-Harris , 536 U.S. 639, 662 (2002) (upholding an Ohio voucher initiative for this reason). The court was careful to note that the school district had not encouraged students to participate or inappropriately endorsed religion. Like Marc, I can imagine some abuses, and hard cases, but this one does not seem (to me) to be one. Best, Rick Richard W. Garnett Professor of Law Associate Dean Notre Dame Law School P.O. Box 780 Notre Dame, IN 46556-0780 574-631-6981 (office) 574-631-4197 (fax) From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marc DeGirolami [marc.degirol...@stjohns.edu] Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2012 10:13 AM To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics Subject: RE: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes One conceivable difficulty is the entanglement problem. When a student transfers in to public school from a religious school, there may be several different sorts of courses that the student will have taken which may combine, in various degrees, “religious” and “secular” components. I’m not sure I agree with Marty that it is always the case that the transferred credits are awarded solely for purely secular courses. Segregating out the secular and religious components can be difficult. And getting the school district involved in determining which are purely secular, and which are mixed, and which are purely religious, might risk excessive entanglement. Having said that, I agree that awarding credits for, e.g., CCD class or equivalent education is problematic. Marc From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marty Lederman Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2012 9:58 AM To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics Subject: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Published/111448.P.pdf A South Carolina school district set up a Zorach-like release time program for religious instruction at an unaccedited religious school. Then it decided to give the participating students academic credit for their purely religious studies in the release-time program. The Fourth Circuit upholds this program, on the theory that it's no different from recognizing credits from a private, accredited religious school when a student transfers to the public school. But in that latter case (or in the related context of giving credit for home-schooling), the credits presumably are awarded based upon the showing or the presumption that they reflect the student's completion of the necessary secular curriculum. Here, the education in question is specifically religious in nature (that's the point, and there's no indication in the opinion of any secular content). That is to say, the credit is being offered for the religious education simplicitur. Is this holding defensible? On Mirror of Justice, Rick Garnett calls it welcome, but it's not obvious to me why that might be so. ___ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others. ___ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others. ___ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private
Re: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes
are constitutionally obligated to allow children and parents to choose whether to fulfill their compulsory education obligations by attending a secular public school or a religious private school. See Pierce v. Soc’y of Sisters , 268 U.S. 510, 534-35 (1925). It would be strange and unfair to penalize such students when they attempt to transfer into the public school system by refusing to honor the grades they earned in their religious courses, potentially preventing them from graduating on schedule with their public school peers. Far from establishing a state religion, the acceptance of transfer credits (including religious credits) by public schools sensibly accommodates the genuine choice among options public and private, secular and religious. Zelman v. Simmons-Harris , 536 U.S. 639, 662 (2002) (upholding an Ohio voucher initiative for this reason). The court was careful to note that the school district had not encouraged students to participate or inappropriately endorsed religion. Like Marc, I can imagine some abuses, and hard cases, but this one does not seem (to me) to be one. Best, Rick Richard W. Garnett Professor of Law Associate Dean Notre Dame Law School P.O. Box 780 Notre Dame, IN 46556-0780 574-631-6981 (office) 574-631-4197 (fax) From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marc DeGirolami [marc.degirol...@stjohns.edu] Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2012 10:13 AM To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics Subject: RE: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes One conceivable difficulty is the entanglement problem. When a student transfers in to public school from a religious school, there may be several different sorts of courses that the student will have taken which may combine, in various degrees, “religious” and “secular” components. I’m not sure I agree with Marty that it is always the case that the transferred credits are awarded solely for purely secular courses. Segregating out the secular and religious components can be difficult. And getting the school district involved in determining which are purely secular, and which are mixed, and which are purely religious, might risk excessive entanglement. Having said that, I agree that awarding credits for, e.g., CCD class or equivalent education is problematic. Marc From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marty Lederman Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2012 9:58 AM To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics Subject: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Published/111448.P.pdf A South Carolina school district set up a Zorach-like release time program for religious instruction at an unaccedited religious school. Then it decided to give the participating students academic credit for their purely religious studies in the release-time program. The Fourth Circuit upholds this program, on the theory that it's no different from recognizing credits from a private, accredited religious school when a student transfers to the public school. But in that latter case (or in the related context of giving credit for home-schooling), the credits presumably are awarded based upon the showing or the presumption that they reflect the student's completion of the necessary secular curriculum. Here, the education in question is specifically religious in nature (that's the point, and there's no indication in the opinion of any secular content). That is to say, the credit is being offered for the religious education simplicitur. Is this holding defensible? On Mirror of Justice, Rick Garnett calls it welcome, but it's not obvious to me why that might be so. ___ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others. ___ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others. ___ To post, send message
RE: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes
Mike Masinter suggested that the Fourth Circuit in Moss was mistaken in relying on its prior decision in Lanner v. Wimmer. Mike put it this way: Lanner affirmed the injunction insofar as it forbade academic credit for elective courses, leaving the school district free on remand to adopt religiously neutral criteria that focus on whether a release time course covers a subject for which credit could be granted. Although Lanner doesn't put release time credit off limits simply because a release time course has religious content, it reaffirms Allen's rule that, religious content aside, the subject covered be one for which a public school can grant academic credit. I have to disagree with his reading of Lanner (and of Allen). The court in Lanner did not require that the subject covered be one for which a public school can grant academic credit. Lanner allowed release time religious instruction to be counted as custodial time credit (that is, to be counted as part of the number of hours each day that the student was to be in class under compulsory attendance laws), and to be counted as eligibility credit (that is, the number of hours of classes per day that the student had to be enrolled in to be eligible for sports teams and other extra-curricular activities). The court would have allowed release time religious instruction to be counted as academic elective credit (that is, to count toward the number of elective units needed for graduation), except for an entanglement problem. Under the state education department's policy, schools were not to give academic elective credit for courses devoted mainly to denominational instruction. The court held that the Establishment Clause did not permit the school to determine whether a course was mainly devoted to denominational instruction, because that would create an impermissible entanglement. Contrary to Mike's reading of the case, the court did not require that the course be one for which a public school could grant academic credit. The court in Lanner stated: If the school officials desire to recognize released-time classes generally as satisfying some elective hours, they are at liberty to do so if their policy is neutrally stated and administered. Recognizing attendance at church-sponsored released-time courses as satisfying graduation requirements advances religion no more than recognizing attendance at released-time courses or full-time church-sponsored schools as satisfying state compulsory attendance laws. If the extent of state supervision is only to insure, just as is permitted in the case of church-sponsored full-time private schools, that certain courses are taught for the requisite hours and that teachers meet minimum qualification standards, nothing in either the establishment or free exercise clauses would prohibit recognizing all released-time classes or none, whether religious in content or not, in satisfaction of graduation requirements. It is when, as here, the program is structured in such a way as to require state officials to monitor and judge what is religious and what is not religious in a private religious institution that the entanglement exceeds permissible accommodation and begins to offend the establishment clause. Mark S. Scarberry Professor of Law Pepperdine Univ. School of Law From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Scarberry, Mark Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2012 10:00 AM To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics Subject: RE: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes Setting aside the Oh, sure, for whatever meaning it may have, the same issues are raised by Zorach. If the school district may release students for religious instruction as an accommodation, must it also release students for Pilates (note the spelling and capitalization) classes, pottery classes, etc.? If a student gets release time for a religious class, or credit for a religious class, then the student should also get release time, or credit, for a philosophy or history of thought or atheism or secular humanist class. I'm not sure how broadly the net must be cast as a matter of constitutional law, but in each instance that question must be addressed. By the way, what makes an outside pottery class any less valuable than an inside pottery class? I have a very ugly coffee mug that I made in a public school 7th grade art class. I doubt that the inside class did any more for my nonexistent artistic skills in furtherance of the school district's mission than an outside class would have. Mark S. Scarberry Professor of Law Pepperdine Univ. School of Law From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edumailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu]mailto:[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marty Lederman Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2012 9:26 AM To: Law Religion issues for Law
RE: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes
Dear Marty, I think we can all unite in support of (and I'd also welcome a meaningful commitment to enhancing) the 3 Rs in our public schools. (I'm pretty confident that those R's are better promoted, generally speaking, in religious schools, but I realize that's a debate for another day.) In any event, I'm not sure why the question is whether or not the fourth R is integral to the public schools' mission (I'm not sure we really know what the public school's mission is and, again, I suspect that whatever it is is at least as well achieved in religious schools as in public schools.) Instead, I'd ask does it 'establish religion' for a public school to allow two credits for religious education courses taken pursuant to a release-time statute, when those courses are approved by an accredited private school and when the state is not involved in any way in the religious instruction? I think the answer to this latter question, both doctrinally and (more important) morally and historically, should be no. There's no entanglement, endorsement, coercion, etc., here. We allow credits for all kinds of courses with debatable connection to the 3-Rs, let alone the public schools' mission. It seems to me that -- again, given that the government is not pushing the release-time option, and is not involved in religious instruction -- it is fine for the political community to, in this very small way, which does not subtract meaningfully from the few affected students' secular course of study and which imposes burdens on no one, accommodate the fact that, for many, religious education is education and perhaps acknowledge the possibility that a child's healthy development is advanced as much by (non-state-provided) religious education as by, say, for-credit classes in pottery, or P.E., or high-school sociology. I'll quit being a bore now, and sign off on this thread, but am always happy to chat offline, if anyone wants to. All the best, Rick Richard W. Garnett Professor of Law Associate Dean Notre Dame Law School P.O. Box 780 Notre Dame, IN 46556-0780 574-631-6981 (office) 574-631-4197 (fax) From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marty Lederman [lederman.ma...@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2012 2:05 PM To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics Cc: Law Religion issues for Law Academics Subject: Re: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes Unless, like Niemeyer, you think that four Rs, not three, are integral to the public school mission. Sent from my iPhone On Jun 30, 2012, at 1:55 PM, Marci Hamilton hamilto...@aol.commailto:hamilto...@aol.com wrote: Marty is undoubtedly correct under current doctrine. The release time program exists I assume to avoid Establishment Cl problems. To now argue entanglement is a problem is a constitutional sleight of hand to avoid a violation. The entanglement argument is particularly weak given the description of the program I also think the entanglement argument is specious given that public and private schools set requirements and criteria to accept credit from other schools all the time. A school does not need to nor does it normally blindly accept courses and/or credits from other schools, private or public. I am at a loss to understand how this decision is salutary from an academic perspective. Sounds to me like it is potentially watering down the 3Rs Marci On Jun 30, 2012, at 11:11 AM, Marty Lederman mailto:lederman.ma...@gmail.comlederman.ma...@gmail.commailto:lederman.ma...@gmail.com wrote: I should add that, wholly apart from whether the particular Spartanburg Bible School class was in any way, as Rick suggests, of some secular educational value (which was, I repeat, not the basis for the court's holding), the South Carolina statute at issue expressly provides that [a] school district board of trustees may award high school students no more than two elective Carnegie units for the completion of released time classes in religious instruction. That is to say, the credits are specifically and unequivocally being awarded for the religious instruction as such. On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 10:47 AM, Marty Lederman mailto:lederman.ma...@gmail.comlederman.ma...@gmail.commailto:lederman.ma...@gmail.com wrote: Rick, The statute says that the school district must use secular criteria to determine whether the release time education qualifies for credits, but those criteria have nothing to do with fulfillment of any of the secular educational objectives of the school (they include the number of hours of instruction; a syllabus that reflects course requirements; a method of assessment used by the religious school teachers; and whether the teachers are certified). The School District here, for admirable nonentanglement reasons, entered into an arrangement with Oakbrook Preparatory School
RE: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes
Subject: RE: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes Setting aside the Oh, sure, for whatever meaning it may have, the same issues are raised by Zorach. If the school district may release students for religious instruction as an accommodation, must it also release students for Pilates (note the spelling and capitalization) classes, pottery classes, etc.? If a student gets release time for a religious class, or credit for a religious class, then the student should also get release time, or credit, for a philosophy or history of thought or atheism or secular humanist class. I'm not sure how broadly the net must be cast as a matter of constitutional law, but in each instance that question must be addressed. By the way, what makes an outside pottery class any less valuable than an inside pottery class? I have a very ugly coffee mug that I made in a public school 7th grade art class. I doubt that the inside class did any more for my nonexistent artistic skills in furtherance of the school district's mission than an outside class would have. Mark S. Scarberry Professor of Law Pepperdine Univ. School of Law From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edumailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu]mailto:[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marty Lederman Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2012 9:26 AM To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics Subject: Re: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes Oh, sure. If a school counts credits for graduation purposes based on total hours spent in any school -- such that it gives credit for the student's outside courses in pottery, Pilades, drivers' education, SAT test-taking, etc. -- then of course it should not, and need not, discriminate against hours spent in religious courses. But no school does any such thing. Instead, the credits presumably must be for classes in service of the school system's pedagogic mission. On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 12:12 PM, Scarberry, Mark mark.scarbe...@pepperdine.edumailto:mark.scarbe...@pepperdine.edu wrote: I'm having trouble seeing just what the awarding of credit means here and how it's problematic that a public school gives students credit for time sitting in a different classroom. There is no constitutional obligation on a public school to provide any particular level or amount or quality of instruction. The awarding of a high school diploma is not a conferring of a public right or license or anything of the sort. I believe that religious schools include religion classes in their curriculum as part of the number of hours of instruction required for graduation under their accrediting bodies' standards and presumably under whatever Education Code may apply. If that practice sufficiently meets societal needs, then I don't understand why (as a matter of constitutional law) the public schools should have to drag in students to sit for additional public school hours when the students have a release time religious educational experience. Consider this hypo: A public school district has relatively few specified high school graduation requirements (only two years of English, two years of math, etc.), but it does require that students be in school from 8am to 3pm. The school district sets up a release time program for religious instruction from 2-3pm. Must the school district now require students who are in the release time program to return to the public school and sit through a study hall period (or other class) for an additional hour, so that they have seven hours on the public school campus? If not, then the release time students are in effect being given credit for their release time educational experience. Mark S. Scarberry Professor of Law Pepperdine Univ. School of Law ___ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edumailto:Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others. ___ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
RE: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes
The tenth circuit's decision in Lanner held that the granting of credit was prohibited by the Est. Clause only because of the requirement that the school officials judge the religious content of the release time courses. It examined and determined all the other features of the program and rejected the arguments that those features violated the Est. Clause. It upheld the program in terms of granting of custody and eligibility credit and distinguished academic elective credit only on the basis I've described. Lanner certainly did not, either in holding or dictum, state that any release time class for which credit was to be given had to be one that the public school could offer for academic credit. Board of Ed. v. Allen certainly does not, either. Mark S. Scarberry Professor of Law Pepperdine Univ. School of Law -Original Message- From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Michael Masinter Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2012 12:20 PM To: religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu Subject: RE: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes The tenth circuit's judgment upheld an injunction against the policy as it was written, and in doing so accurately cited Allen. The panel's later statement of what the school district might do on remand purported to decide an issue not before it (the constitutionality of a program the school had never adopted), and to that extent, would seem to be dictum, not binding in the tenth circuit and, for the reasons already discussed, not even persuasive in the fourth circuit. As a close friend who served for many years on a court of appeals regularly reminded his colleagues the more we write beyond what is necessary to decide a case, the more from which we will later have to recede. I should qualify what I wrote in this respect, though -- I'm not entirely confident that the Court as currently comprised would find teaching religious doctrine in a public school elective course to be unconstitutional, though I hope that for Chief Justice Roberts, that would be a bridge too far. Mike Michael R. Masinter 3305 College Avenue Professor of Law Fort Lauderdale, FL 33314 Nova Southeastern University 954.262.6151 (voice) masin...@nova.edu954.262.3835 (fax) Quoting Scarberry, Mark mark.scarbe...@pepperdine.edu: Mike Masinter suggested that the Fourth Circuit in Moss was mistaken in relying on its prior decision in Lanner v. Wimmer. Mike put it this way: Lanner affirmed the injunction insofar as it forbade academic credit for elective courses, leaving the school district free on remand to adopt religiously neutral criteria that focus on whether a release time course covers a subject for which credit could be granted. Although Lanner doesn't put release time credit off limits simply because a release time course has religious content, it reaffirms Allen's rule that, religious content aside, the subject covered be one for which a public school can grant academic credit. I have to disagree with his reading of Lanner (and of Allen). The court in Lanner did not require that the subject covered be one for which a public school can grant academic credit. Lanner allowed release time religious instruction to be counted as custodial time credit (that is, to be counted as part of the number of hours each day that the student was to be in class under compulsory attendance laws), and to be counted as eligibility credit (that is, the number of hours of classes per day that the student had to be enrolled in to be eligible for sports teams and other extra-curricular activities). The court would have allowed release time religious instruction to be counted as academic elective credit (that is, to count toward the number of elective units needed for graduation), except for an entanglement problem. Under the state education department's policy, schools were not to give academic elective credit for courses devoted mainly to denominational instruction. The court held that the Establishment Clause did not permit the school to determine whether a course was mainly devoted to denominational instruction, because that would create an impermissible entanglement. Contrary to Mike's reading of the case, the court did not require that the course be one for which a public school could grant academic credit. The court in Lanner stated: If the school officials desire to recognize released-time classes generally as satisfying some elective hours, they are at liberty to do so if their policy is neutrally stated and administered. Recognizing attendance at church-sponsored released-time courses as satisfying graduation requirements advances religion no more than recognizing attendance at released-time courses
Re: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes
As a product of public schools who has chosen where to live based on the excellence of the public schools for my children, I cannot let Rick get away with his shot at the public schools without comment! But like him, I will move on. On the merits, I don't see why or how the public schools can take frankly ecclesiastical courses from frankly religious schools for credit under existing doctrine. Now, if the argument is that the Court should and may abandon the Establishment Clause, let's be honest about that. It is well known that those hostile to separation are hoping this new Court will cut back on the Est Cl Under existing doctrine, these credits are a violation of the separation of church and state and the Memorial and Remonstrance. Marci On Jun 30, 2012, at 2:52 PM, Rick Garnett rgarn...@nd.edu wrote: Dear Marty, I think we can all unite in support of (and I'd also welcome a meaningful commitment to enhancing) the 3 Rs in our public schools. (I'm pretty confident that those R's are better promoted, generally speaking, in religious schools, but I realize that's a debate for another day.) In any event, I'm not sure why the question is whether or not the fourth R is integral to the public schools' mission (I'm not sure we really know what the public school's mission is and, again, I suspect that whatever it is is at least as well achieved in religious schools as in public schools.) Instead, I'd ask does it 'establish religion' for a public school to allow two credits for religious education courses taken pursuant to a release-time statute, when those courses are approved by an accredited private school and when the state is not involved in any way in the religious instruction? I think the answer to this latter question, both doctrinally and (more important) morally and historically, should be no. There's no entanglement, endorsement, coercion, etc., here. We allow credits for all kinds of courses with debatable connection to the 3-Rs, let alone the public schools' mission. It seems to me that -- again, given that the government is not pushing the release-time option, and is not involved in religious instruction -- it is fine for the political community to, in this very small way, which does not subtract meaningfully from the few affected students' secular course of study and which imposes burdens on no one, accommodate the fact that, for many, religious education is education and perhaps acknowledge the possibility that a child's healthy development is advanced as much by (non-state-provided) religious education as by, say, for-credit classes in pottery, or P.E., or high-school sociology. I'll quit being a bore now, and sign off on this thread, but am always happy to chat offline, if anyone wants to. All the best, Rick Richard W. Garnett Professor of Law Associate Dean Notre Dame Law School P.O. Box 780 Notre Dame, IN 46556-0780 574-631-6981 (office) 574-631-4197 (fax) From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marty Lederman [lederman.ma...@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2012 2:05 PM To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics Cc: Law Religion issues for Law Academics Subject: Re: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes Unless, like Niemeyer, you think that four Rs, not three, are integral to the public school mission. Sent from my iPhone On Jun 30, 2012, at 1:55 PM, Marci Hamilton hamilto...@aol.com wrote: Marty is undoubtedly correct under current doctrine. The release time program exists I assume to avoid Establishment Cl problems. To now argue entanglement is a problem is a constitutional sleight of hand to avoid a violation. The entanglement argument is particularly weak given the description of the program I also think the entanglement argument is specious given that public and private schools set requirements and criteria to accept credit from other schools all the time. A school does not need to nor does it normally blindly accept courses and/or credits from other schools, private or public. I am at a loss to understand how this decision is salutary from an academic perspective. Sounds to me like it is potentially watering down the 3Rs Marci On Jun 30, 2012, at 11:11 AM, Marty Lederman lederman.ma...@gmail.com wrote: I should add that, wholly apart from whether the particular Spartanburg Bible School class was in any way, as Rick suggests, of some secular educational value (which was, I repeat, not the basis for the court's holding), the South Carolina statute at issue expressly provides that [a] school district board of trustees may award high school students no more than two elective Carnegie units for the completion of released time classes in religious instruction. That is to say, the credits
RE: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes
I share some list members’ discomfort with Zorach, and with the South Carolina law that gives favored treatment to religious studies classes, rather than just releasing students to take a class at any other accredited school or at any unaccredited school if the class is certified by an accredited school. I’m sure I’m “hostile to separation” in Marci’s view, and though I’m entirely irreligious myself I am indeed hostile to the separation that Marci advocates. Yet I do think that this sort of discrimination in favor of religion ought to be seen as constitutionally suspect, and I regret that Zorach took a different view. But the argument below seems to me to go too far, because of the transfer student point raised by Rick and by the Fourth Circuit opinion. Say that someone transfers to a public school in the 11th grade, and to be entitled to so transfer he has to show some number of semester-hours of schoolwork at his prior school; and say that the prior school had a pervasively religious curriculum, so that many classes have a religious component. Is it really the case that the public school is constitutionally barred from accepting those semester-hours? I would think not, though I’d be happy to hear Marci’s view on the subject. Now perhaps there is some constitutional distinction between pure theology classes and mixed religious/nonreligious classes – but when it comes to funding programs, the Souter/Stevens/Brennan/Marshall wing has generally insisted that there is no such distinction. So it seems to me that the constitutional objection can’t be to schools accepting credit for religious instruction from other schools; the objection must be to schools doing so under programs that favor religious instruction. Eugene Marci Hamilton writes: On the merits, I don't see why or how the public schools can take frankly ecclesiastical courses from frankly religious schools for credit under existing doctrine. Now, if the argument is that the Court should and may abandon the Establishment Clause, let's be honest about that. It is well known that those hostile to separation are hoping this new Court will cut back on the Est Cl Under existing doctrine, these credits are a violation of the separation of church and state and the Memorial and Remonstrance. ___ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
RE: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes
I agree with Eugene's concern about discrimination and the concern of other list members about release time programs that subject non-participants to dead time at public school. My daughter experienced the latter when she attended public school in Nova Scotia. There was no release time program offered for Jewish students and no educational instruction when Catholic and Protestant children went off for religious instruction -- provided by clergy at the public school. (My daughter had no complaints. She played with the hamsters in her classroom.) If those concerns are satisfied, I think the remaining issues depend a lot on the nature of the course and our understanding of what it means for a public educational institution to assign credit to an activity. The credit problem is particularly difficult since credit is a creation of the state. (I can imagine a school that awards limited credit for participation in social, religious, or political activities where the scope of acceptable activities resembles a public forum.) Let me suggest what I assume is the hardest case. If a religious private high school school awarded academic credit for attendance at worship services (on the Sabbath or during the weekday), could that count as satisfying the minimum academic requirements for receiving a high school diploma? May a public school accept those units if the student transfers to the public school? Would attendance at worship services be acceptable for release time purposes? (We can add an exam on the structure and meaning of the service if that is required.) The next difficult case would be classes designed to prepare a student for a religious ceremony or event. Would it be appropriate for a school to assign academic credit for Bar or Bat Mitzvah classes (or equivalent instruction in other faiths)? Alan From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] on behalf of Volokh, Eugene [vol...@law.ucla.edu] Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2012 1:18 PM To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics Subject: RE: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes I share some list members’ discomfort with Zorach, and with the South Carolina law that gives favored treatment to religious studies classes, rather than just releasing students to take a class at any other accredited school or at any unaccredited school if the class is certified by an accredited school. I’m sure I’m “hostile to separation” in Marci’s view, and though I’m entirely irreligious myself I am indeed hostile to the separation that Marci advocates. Yet I do think that this sort of discrimination in favor of religion ought to be seen as constitutionally suspect, and I regret that Zorach took a different view. But the argument below seems to me to go too far, because of the transfer student point raised by Rick and by the Fourth Circuit opinion. Say that someone transfers to a public school in the 11th grade, and to be entitled to so transfer he has to show some number of semester-hours of schoolwork at his prior school; and say that the prior school had a pervasively religious curriculum, so that many classes have a religious component. Is it really the case that the public school is constitutionally barred from accepting those semester-hours? I would think not, though I’d be happy to hear Marci’s view on the subject. Now perhaps there is some constitutional distinction between pure theology classes and mixed religious/nonreligious classes – but when it comes to funding programs, the Souter/Stevens/Brennan/Marshall wing has generally insisted that there is no such distinction. So it seems to me that the constitutional objection can’t be to schools accepting credit for religious instruction from other schools; the objection must be to schools doing so under programs that favor religious instruction. Eugene Marci Hamilton writes: On the merits, I don't see why or how the public schools can take frankly ecclesiastical courses from frankly religious schools for credit under existing doctrine. Now, if the argument is that the Court should and may abandon the Establishment Clause, let's be honest about that. It is well known that those hostile to separation are hoping this new Court will cut back on the Est Cl Under existing doctrine, these credits are a violation of the separation of church and state and the Memorial and Remonstrance. ___ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can
