WEST Virginia State Board OF Education V. Barnette 319 U.S. 624 (1943) PDF

Preview

Summary

Case Brief...

Description

CAPTION: WEST VIRGINIA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION V. BARNETTE 319 U.S. 624 (1943)

I. JUDICIAL HISTORY. J.W. challenged in trial court. District Court sided with the lower court’s decision. School district filed writ of certiorari and said writ was granted. II. FACTS Following Gobitis, WV legislature required public schools to teach courses to increase knowledge of American system of government. Saluting flag was also mandatory along with Pledge. Penalties included expulsion, delinquent status for children. Parents were subject to fines and jail time up to 30 days and in some instances, non-compliant kids with reform school. III. ISSUES Does 1st Amendment allow for students’ refusal to recite Pledge & salute the flag? IV. LAW AND RULES 1. Minersville School District v. Gobitis 2. Stromberg v. CA (1931) V. DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS Jackson found that the First Amendment cannot countenance efforts to enforce a unanimity of opinion on any topic, and national symbols like the flag should not receive a level of deference that trumps constitutional protections. He argued that curtailing or eliminating dissent was not only an improper but also an ineffective way of producing true unity, using historical examples. Jackson rejected an earlier opinion by Justice Felix Frankfurter that objectors like Jehovah's Witnesses should use the legislative rather than the judicial process to assert their rights. He found that some minority groups would not be able to access their protections under the Bill of Rights without resorting to the courts. Black and Douglas wrote to repudiate their earlier opinions in First Amendment decisions and voice an especially enthusiastic support for its protections. Concerned about exceeding the scope of the judicial role, Frankfurter was skeptical that religious beliefs freed citizens from the obligation to obey rules. In a controversial passage, he argued that his Jewish heritage made him particularly sensitive to the importance of constitutional protections, so his views should be taken seriously. (This was mostly a response to critics of his earlier decision on the Free Exercise Clause, which allowed states to restrict the rights of individuals to exercise their religious beliefs.) He pointed out that the Court is essentially acquiring a legislative function when it strikes down a law with which it disagrees, and the absence of a check on its power to do so means that it should be careful when overriding the democratic process.

VI. CONCLUSION Compulsory flag salute/pledge transcends constitutional limits on power of authorities and interferes w/ first amendment rights of students. Judgment enjoining enforcement of WV Regulation is affirmed. Decision of Court in Minersville and holdings of per curiam decisions which preceded/overshadowed it are overruled. VII. SIGNIFICANCE (FOR PSC 307, 308 and PAD 612/412 ONLY) 1st amendment could not enforce unanimity of opinion on any topic. National symbols i.e. the flag could not receive deference that trumps constitutional protections. Elimination of dissent was improper/ineffective way of generating unity....