Religion Clauses

These two cases are similar because they both involve the government displaying religious holiday artifacts, such as the Christian nativity crèche, and whether or not these displays violate the First Amendment's Establishment Clause. Despite the fact that the cases dealt with comparable issues, they resulted in two different decisions.

These two cases connect because the lead back to the
First Amendment which forbids Congress from establishing religion. The government is prohibited from making any law "respecting an institution of religion" under the Establishment Clause. This section prohibits the government from not only creating an official religion, but also from taking actions that favor one religion over another unfairly, while in the Religion Clause No law establishing a religion shall be passed by Congress.

These two cases connect because they both use the governments money to pay for students to have the ability to learn about religion during school time. The United States Supreme Court ruled in Everson v Board of Education that a New Jersey legislation that paid parents for school transportation costs regardless of whether their children attended public or private schools did not violate the Establishment Clause. However, in the McCollum vs. Board Of Education, The Supreme Court struck down a "released time" arrangement in which public schools provide religious instruction during regular school hours, ruling that it violated the First Amendment's establishment clause.

These 3 cases are connected because they all involve the endorsement of religion whether it be using money from the government for religious education (Tax Money For Religious Education), being in a tax supported school and being given time for prayer (Prayer In Public Schools), or placing religious symbols is tax supported grounds (Religious Symbols In Public Spaces).

These cases connect because they both include the governments opinion on prayer in public school and whether or not it should be permitted. Engel was addressing whether school authorities might set aside time for voluntary quiet prayer, not whether an officially sanctioned prayer could be offered. Wallace v Jaffree , raised this question. On the other hand, In Lee v Weisman, the court looked at school prayer in the context of a middle school graduation ceremony.

The Lemon Test and the Wall Of Separation are similar because there can't be extreme association between church and state. The Lemon test can only help and support things involving religion; if the support is for a secular purpose, it should not discourage or promote religion.

These cases are connected because they both build off of a nondenominational speech to avoid giving the impression that the government-funded schools encourage religion. The Supreme Court found in Santa Fe Independent School District that a school policy of commencing football games with a prayer led by a nominated student body representative violated the First Amendment's establishment clause; The Lee vs. Weisman case restricted the role religion plays in public schools by prohibiting prayer at school-sponsored activities.