Also known as: wall of separation · separation of church and state · Establishment Clause
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A constitutional principle derived from the Religion Clauses that bars government from setting up an official church, enacting laws that aid one religion or all religions, or preferring one religion over another. The principle prohibits government from composing or endorsing prayers, funding religious indoctrination, or compelling participation in religious exercises. It permits neutral programs that incidentally benefit religious institutions through private choice but forbids actions that endorse religion or target it for disfavor.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
President issues an order barring entry of construction workers from several majority-Muslim nations after intelligence reports flag sabotage risks at State A ports and military bases. Nova Structures, a U.S. contractor, sues claiming the order endorses religious hostility. The court applies rational basis review in the immigration context and upholds the order because its stated national security purpose is rationally related to the restrictions.
The University of Virginia denies funding to a student newspaper that publishes religious viewpoints while funding secular student publications. The newspaper's editors sue, arguing the denial discriminates against religious speech. The court holds that the university must provide equal access to the funding program because excluding religious perspectives would violate neutrality rather than enforce separation.
A state board requires public school students to salute the flag each morning. Willow Walker, a student whose faith forbids such gestures, refuses and faces expulsion. Her parents sue, contending the requirement forces profession of belief. The court invalidates the mandate because government may not compel affirmation of any creed or symbol.
State A reimburses salaries of teachers who provide secular instruction at religious elementary schools. Warwick Electronics, a taxpayer group, sues to enjoin the payments. The court strikes down the program because it creates excessive entanglement between government and religious institutions through ongoing state oversight of religious school operations.
The City of Hialeah enacts an ordinance banning animal sacrifice after a Santeria church announces plans to perform rituals. Church members sue, showing the law exempts secular killings of animals but singles out their ceremonies. The court invalidates the ordinance because it targets religious conduct for suppression rather than advancing a neutral interest.
Wisconsin enforces its compulsory attendance law against Amish parents who withdraw children after eighth grade for religious vocational training. The parents sue, demonstrating that their community is self-sufficient and that formal high school would undermine core religious tenets. The court grants an exemption because the state's interest in education is satisfied by the alternative religious practices without formal secondary schooling.
No. Neutral programs that provide benefits to individuals who then choose religious options do not violate the principle when any benefit to religion is incidental and results from private choice rather than state endorsement.
No. When a state subsidizes private education, it may not disqualify religious schools solely because they are religious. The principle requires equal treatment of religious and nonreligious schools in neutral programs.
…says, between allowing a patchwork of exemptions that would hinder its law enforcement efforts, and risking a violation of the Establishment Clause by arbitrarily limiting its religious exemptions. This argument, however, could be made in almost any free exercise case. See Lupu, Where Rights Begin: The Problem of Burdens on the Free…
…publicschool students to leave school grounds during school hours to receive religious instruction does not violate the Establishment Clause
…States. I agree, and I also believe that RFRA is unconstitutional as applied to the Federal Government because it violates the Establishment Clause
…must not ignore the danger that an exception from a general obligation of citizenship on religious grounds may run afoul of the Establishment Clause, but that danger cannot be allowed to prevent any exception no matter how vital it may be to the protection of values promoted by the right of free exercise. By preserving doctrinal…
…by the proclamation. They challenged the proclamation on various grounds, including claims that it violates the INA and the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The District Court granted a nationwide preliminary injunction barring enforcement of the proclamation’s entry restrictions. The Ninth Circuit affirmed. Held: The…
Yes. Displaying religious texts such as the Ten Commandments in classrooms serves a religious purpose that the principle forbids, even when the government claims a secular educational goal.
Courts apply rational basis review and defer to the political branches. An order restricting entry from majority-Muslim countries survives if it states a national security purpose rationally related to the restrictions, even when statements suggest religious animus.
No. A state may exclude pursuit of a devotional theology degree from an otherwise neutral scholarship program without violating the principle, because the exclusion reflects a permissible decision not to support clerical training with public funds.