CHAMBERLIN ET AL.
v.
DADE COUNTY BOARD OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION ET AL.

U.S. | 1964-06-01
No. 939
with whom Mr. Justice Black agrees,, Mr. Justice Stewart would note probable jurisdiction of this appeal and set it down for argument on the merits.
377 U.S. 402 Supreme Court of the United States (1964) Positive Treatment
Also reported at: 12 L. Ed. 2d 407 · 84 S. Ct. 1272 · 1964 U.S. LEXIS 1141 · SCDB 1963-132
Cited by 8 cases
Topics
Standing First Amendment Fourteenth Amendment

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Standing cases and more on FLexlaw

Per_curiam
Per Curiam.

Per Curiam.

The motion to use the record in No. 520, October Term 1962, is granted. The judgment of the Florida Supreme Court is reversed with respect to the issues of the constitutionality of prayer, and of devotional Bible reading pursuant to a Florida statute, Fla. Stat. (1961) § 231.09, in the public schools of Dade County. School District of Abington Township v. Schempp, 374 U. S. 203. As to the other questions raised, the appeal is dismissed for want of properly presented federal questions. Asbury Hospital v. Cass County, 326 U. S. 207, 213-214.

Concurrence
Mr. Justice Douglas,

Mr. Justice Douglas,

with whom Mr. Justice Black agrees,

concurring in part.

I join in reversing the Supreme Court of Florida on the main issue in the case.

The “other questions raised” which the Court refuses to consider because not “properly presented” involve the constitutionality under the First and Fourteenth Amendments of baccalaureate services in the schools, a religious census among pupils, and a religious test for teachers. The Florida Supreme Court disposed of those issues on the authority of Doremus v. Board of Education, 342 U. S. 429, which held that a taxpayer lacks standing to challenge religious exercises in the public schools. Irrespective of Doremus v. Board of Education, supra, I think it is arguable that appellant-taxpayers do have standing to challenge these practices.

I think, however, that two of those “other questions”— the baccalaureate services and the religious census — do not present substantial federal questions, and so I concur in the dismissal of the appeal as to them. As to the religious test for teachers,* I think a substantial question is presented. Cf. Torcaso v. Watkins, 367 U. S. 488. I would therefore put that question down for argument, postponing the question of jurisdiction to the merits.

Mr. Justice Stewart would note probable jurisdiction of this appeal and set it down for argument on the merits.

*

Applicants for teaching positions are required to answer the question, “Do you believe in God?” Religious attitudes are also considered in making promotions.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Harlow Chamberlin v. The Dade Cnty. Bd. OF Pub. Instruction, 171 So. 2d 535 (Fla. 1965)
    …BERTS and THORNAL, JJ., and SMITH, Circuit Judge, concur. .374 U.S. 487, 83 S.Ct. 1864, 10 L.Ed.2d 1043 (1963). .School District of Abington Township v. Schempp (Murray v. Curlett), 374 U.S. 203, 83 S.Ct. 1560 (1963). .160 So. 2d 97 (Fla.1964). . 377 U.S. 402, 84 S.Ct. 1272, 12 L.Ed.2d 407 (1964).…
  • Mangold v. The Albert Gallatin Area Sch. Dist., 438 F.2d 1194 (3d Cir. 1971)
    …ible reading alone is unconstitutional under Schempp, it must follow that the religious program in this case, which involved Bible reading and prayer as well, must also be unconstitutional. See Chamberlin v. Dade County, Board of Public Instruction, 377 U.S. 402, 84 S.Ct. 1272, 12 L.Ed.2d 407 (1964). Accordingly, the December 18, 1969, order of the district court declaring this practice unconstitutional and enjoining its continuance will be affirmed. . Action of school authorities in their official cap…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw