ZORACH V CLAUSEN 343 U.S 306 1952 ZORACH V CLAUSEN U.S CONSTITUTION U.S GOV'T JUDICIAL RELIGION EDUCATION U.S GOVERNMENT AND CONSTITUTION SIGNIFICANCE IN THIS CASE THE SUPREME COURT MODIFIED ITS VIEW ON SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS IT RULED THAT SCHOOLS COULD MAKE ALLOWANCES FOR STUDENTS RECEIVING RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION IN CHURCHES AWAY FROM SCHOOL GROUNDS BACKGROUND NEW YORK CITY ALLOWED ITS PUBLIC SCHOOLS TO RELEASE STUDENTS DURING SCHOOL HOURS TO ATTEND RELIGIOUS EXERCISES OR INSTRUCTION THE STUDENTS HAD TO HAVE WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THEIR PARENTS AND THE CHURCHES SENT REGULAR ATTENDANCE REPORTS TO THE SCHOOLS ZORACH AND OTHER TAXPAYERS AND PARENTS SUED CLAUSEN AND OTHER SCHOOL BOARD MEMBERS SAYING THIS RELEASED TIME PROGRAM DURING SCHOOL HOURS VIOLATED THE SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE DECISION THIS CASE WAS ARGUED ON JANUARY 31 FEBRUARY 1 1952 AND DECIDED ON APRIL 28 1952 BY A VOTE OF 6 TO 3 JUSTICE WILLIAM DOUGLAS SPOKE FOR COURT WHICH RULED IN FAVOR OF THE SCHOOL BOARD THE COURT HELD THAT THE RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION OFFERED WAS ENTIRELY OPTIONAL AND CONDUCTED AWAY FROM SCHOOL GROUNDS NO STUDENT WAS FORCED TO TAKE PART IN ANY RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION THE COURT ADDED THAT BY ALLOWING FOR MAXIMUM FREEDOM OF RELIGION THE RELEASED TIME PROGRAM WAS IN LINE WITH THE INTENTION OF THE ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE TO RESPECT OR ENDORSE NO SINGLE RELIGIOUS BELIEF OR INSTITUTION JUSTICES HUGO BLACK FELIX FRANKFURTER AND ROBERT JACKSON DISSENTED ARGUING THAT IN THIS CASE THE SENDING OF ATTENDANCE RECORDS FROM THE RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS TO THE SCHOOLS PROVED THAT CHURCH AND STATE WERE TOO ENTANGLED EXCERPT FROM THE OPINION OF THE COURT WHEN THE STATE ENCOURAGES RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION OR COOPERATES WITH RELIGIOUS AUTHORITIES BY ADJUSTING THE SCHEDULE OF PUBLIC EVENTS TO SECTARIAN NEEDS IT FOLLOWS THE BEST OF OUR TRADITIONS FOR IT THEN RESPECTS THE RELIGIOUS NATURE OF OUR PEOPLE AND ACCOMMODATES THE PUBLIC SERVICE TO THEIR SPIRITUAL NEEDS GOVERNMENT MAY NOT FINANCE RELIGIOUS GROUPS NOR UNDERTAKE RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION BUT WE FIND NO CONSTITUTIONAL REQUIREMENT WHICH MAKES IT NECESSARY FOR GOVERNMENT TO BE HOSTILE TO RELIGION AND TO THROW ITS WEIGHT AGAINST EFFORTS TO WIDEN THE EFFECTIVE SCOPE OF RELIGIOUS INFLUENCE
