How cited: Illinois Ex Rel. McCollum v. Board of Ed. of School Dist. No. 71, Champaign Cty. · Go Syfert

Illinois Ex Rel. McCollum v. Board of Ed. of School Dist. No. 71, Champaign Cty. (1948)

green · 2,298 citation events across 133 courts. Showing the 50 strongest citers on record (one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 1948 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
194819872026
Rule Authority · SCOTUS · 6 citations in this opinion
No. 71, Champaign County, 333 U. S. 203, 209-210 (1948) (release time program invalid where students were "released in part from their legal duty [to attend school] upon the condition that they attend the religious classes").
release time program invalid where students were "released in part from their legal duty [to attend school] upon the condition that they attend the religious classes"
green Mitchell v. Helms (2000)
Rule Authority · SCOTUS · 3 citations in this opinion
McCollum v. Board of Ed. of School Dish No. 71, Champaign Cty., 333 U. S. 203, 228 (1948). “[Government and religion have discrete interests which are mutually best served when each avoids too close a proximity to the other.
green Carson v. Makin (2022)
Rule Authority · SCOTUS · 2 citations in this opinion
No. 71, Champaign Cty., 333 U. S. 203, 211 (1948).
Rule Authority · SCOTUS · 2 citations in this opinion
No. 71, Champaign Cty., 333 U. S. 203, 237-238 (1948) (Jackson, J., concurring) (noting that the Constitution does not tell judges “where the secular ends and the sectarian begins in education”).
Jackson, J., concurring
Rule Authority · SCOTUS · 2 citations in this opinion
No. 71, Champaign Cty., 333 U. S. 203, 212 (1948).
green Lee v. Weisman (1992)
Quote Authority · SCOTUS · 2 citations in this opinion
No. 71, Champaign Cty., 333 U. S. 203, 212 (1948) ("[T]he First Amendment rests upon the premise that both religion and government can best work to achieve their lofty aims if each is left free from the other within its respective sphere"). [9] "[T]he Establishment Clause is infringed when the government makes adherence to religion relevant to a person's standing in the political community.
"[T]he First Amendment rests upon the premise that both religion and government can best work to achieve their lofty aims if each is left free from the other within its respective sphere"
Rule Authority · SCOTUS · 2 citations in this opinion
No. 71, Champaign County, 333 U. S. 203, 211-212 (1948).
green Edwards v. Aguillard (1987)
Rule Authority · SCOTUS · 2 citations in this opinion
McCollum v. Board of Education, 333 U. S. 203, 231 (1948) (opinion of Frankfurter, J.).
opinion of Frankfurter, J.
Rule Authority · SCOTUS
No. 71, Champaign Cty., 333 U. S. 203, 211 (1948).
Rule Authority · SCOTUS
No. 71, Champaign Cty., 333 U. S. 203, 211 (1948).
Rule Authority · SCOTUS
No. 71, Champaign Cty., 333 U. S. 203, 231 (1948) (Frankfur- ter, J., concurring).
Frankfur- ter, J., concurring
Rule Authority · SCOTUS
No. 71, Champaign Cty., 333 U.S. 203, 231 (1948) (Frankfurter, J., concurring) ("In no activity of the State is it more vital to keep out divisive forces than in its schools ..."). 70 This case is undoubtedly close.
Frankfurter, J., concurring
Rule Authority · 5th Cir. · 8 citations in this opinion
No. 71, Champaign County, Ill., 333 U.S. 203, 205 , 68 S.Ct. 461, 462 , 92 L.Ed. 649, 655-56 (1948), concerned the permissibility of providing religious instruction on public school premises during regular hours.
Rule Authority · 5th Cir. · 8 citations in this opinion
No. 71, Champaign County, Ill., 333 U.S. 203, 205 , 68 S.Ct. 461, 462 , 92 L.Ed. 649, 655-56 (1948), concerned the permissibility of providing religious instruction on public school premises during regular hours.
Rule Authority · 5th Cir. · 5 citations in this opinion
McCollum v. Bd. of Educ., 333 U.S. 203, 231 (1948)).
Quote Authority · 3rd Cir. · 4 citations in this opinion
No. 71, 333 U.S. 203, 212 (1948) (“[T]he First Amendment rests upon the premise that both religion and government can best work to achieve their lofty aims if each is left free from the other within its respective sphere.”).
“[T]he First Amendment rests upon the premise that both religion and government can best work to achieve their lofty aims if each is left free from the other within its respective sphere.”
Quote Authority · 3rd Cir. · 4 citations in this opinion
McCollum v. Board of Educ., 333 U.S. 203, 212 , 68 S.Ct. 461, 466 , 92 L.Ed. 649 (1948) ("[A]s we said in the Everson case, the First Amendment has erected a wall between Church and State which must be kept high and impregnable."); id. at 231 , 68 S.Ct. at 474 (Frankfurter, J., concurring) ("Separation means separation, not something less.
"[A]s we said in the Everson case, the First Amendment has erected a wall between Church and State which must be kept high and impregnable."
green Doe v. Porter (2004)
Quote Authority · 6th Cir. · 3 citations in this opinion
McCollum v. Bd. of Educ., 333 U.S. 203, 209-10 , 68 S.Ct. 461 , 92 L.Ed. 649 (1948) (“[T]he use of tax-supported property for religious instruction and the close cooperation between the school authorities and the religious council in promoting religious education ... falls squarely under the ban of the First Amendment.”); Doe v. Human, 725 F.Supp. 1503, 1504-1506, 1508 (W.D.Ark.1989) (relying on McCol-lum to invalidate a program in which Catholic, Jewish and Protestant instr…
“[T]he use of tax-supported property for religious instruction and the close cooperation between the school authorities and the religious council in promoting religious education ... falls squarely under the ban of the First Amendment.”
green Doe v. Porter (2004)
Quote Authority · 6th Cir. · 3 citations in this opinion
McCollum v. Bd. of Educ., 333 U.S. 203, 209-10 , 68 S.Ct. 461 , 92 L.Ed. 649 (1948) ("[T]he use of tax-supported property for religious instruction and the close cooperation between the school authorities and the religious council in promoting religious education ... falls squarely under the ban of the First Amendment."); Doe v. Human, 725 F.Supp. 1503, 1504-1506, 1508 (W.D.Ark.1989) (relying on McCollum to invalidate a program in which Catholic, Jewish and Protestant instru…
"[T]he use of tax-supported property for religious instruction and the close cooperation between the school authorities and the religious council in promoting religious education ... falls squarely under the ban of the First Amendment."
Rule Authority · 10th Cir. · 2 citations in this opinion
McCollum v. Board of Education, 333 U.S. 203, 231 (1948) (Frankfurter, J., concurring). 2 For an excellent discussion of this unique history see Society of Separationists, Inc. v. Whitehead, 870 P.2d 916 (Utah 1993) (Utah Supreme Court upheld Salt Lake City Council’s practice of permitting prayer during opening portion of council meetings). -4- A. SUMMARY OF FACTS AND ALLEGATIONS Rachel Bauchman was a sophomore at Salt Lake City's West High School during the 1994-95 school y…
Utah Supreme Court upheld Salt Lake City Council’s practice of permitting prayer during opening portion of council meetings
Rule Authority · 3rd Cir.
But even assuming the Establishment Clause requires equal treatment in primary and secondary 69 333 U.S. 203, 231 (1948). 70 374 U.S. at 223 . 71 505 U.S. at 582 (citation omitted). 72 530 U.S. at 306 (citation omitted). 73 App. 460–61. 74 Kennedy, 597 U.S. at 537 . 17 school curricula,75 the record does not show favoritism here.
Rule Authority · 9th Cir.
No. 71, Champaign Cnty., Ill., 333 U.S. 203, 237 (1948) (Jackson, J., concurring).
Jackson, J., concurring
Rule Authority · 7th Cir.
No. 71, Champaign Cnty., 333 U.S. 203, 211-12 (1948) (religious instruction in public schools held unconstitutional).
religious instruction in public schools held unconstitutional
Rule Authority · 7th Cir.
No. 71, Champaign Cnty., 333 U.S. 203, 211-12 (1948) (religious instruction in public schools held unconstitutional).
religious instruction in public schools held unconstitutional
green Morgan v. Swanson (2011)
Quote Authority · 5th Cir. · signal: see
See McCollum v. Bd. of Educ., 333 U.S. 203, 211-12 (1948) (“hostility to religion [and] religious teachings” is “at war with our national tradition as embodied in the First Amendment’s guaranty of the free exercise of religion”); cf. Michael W.
“hostility to religion [and] religious teachings” is “at war with our national tradition as embodied in the First Amendment’s guaranty of the free exercise of religion”
green Morgan v. Swanson (2011)
Quote Authority · 5th Cir. · signal: see
See McCollum v. Bd. of Educ., 333 U.S. 203, 211-12 (1948) (“hostility to religion [and] religious teachings” is “at war with our national tradition as embodied in the First Amendment’s guaranty of the free exercise of religion”); cf. Michael W.
“hostility to religion [and] religious teachings” is “at war with our national tradition as embodied in the First Amendment’s guaranty of the free exercise of religion”
green Morgan v. Swanson (2011)
Quote Authority · 5th Cir. · signal: see
See McCollum v. Bd. of Educ., 333 U.S. 203, 211-12 (1948) (“hostility to religion [and] religious teachings” is “at war with our national tradition as embodied in the First Amendment’s guaranty of the free exercise of religion”); cf. Michael W.
“hostility to religion [and] religious teachings” is “at war with our national tradition as embodied in the First Amendment’s guaranty of the free exercise of religion”
Rule Authority · 8th Cir.
Dist. of Abington, 374 U.S. at 225, 300, 306 ; McCollum v. Bd. of Educ., 333 U.S. 203, 236 (1948) (Jackson, J., concurring) ("One can hardly respect a system of education that would leave the student wholly ignorant of the currents of religious thought."); Books, 235 F.3d at 302 ("The display of a religious symbol still may, under certain circumstances, have a secular purpose.").
Jackson, J., concurring
Rule Authority · 8th Cir.
Dist. of Abington, 374 U.S. at 225, 300, 306 ; McCollum v. Bd. of Educ., 333 U.S. 203, 236 (1948) (Jackson, J., concurring) (“One can hardly respect a system of education that would leave the student wholly ignorant of the currents of religious thought.”); Books, 235 F.3d at 302 (“The display of a religious symbol still may, under certain circumstances, have a secular purpose.”).
Jackson, J., concurring
Rule Authority · 9th Cir.
McCollum v. Board of Educ., 333 U.S. 203, 238 (1948) (Jackson, J., concurring).
Jackson, J., concurring
Rule Authority · 5th Cir.
McCollum v. Board of Educ., 333 U.S. 203, 206 (1948). 12 See Bender v. Williamsport Area Sch.
Rule Authority · 4th Cir.
McCollum v. Board of Educ., 333 U.S. 203, 236 (1948) (Jackson, J., concurring).
Jackson, J., concurring
green Chandler v. Siegleman (1999)
Rule Authority · 11th Cir.
In any event, the “wall” concept has been acknowledged by the Court itself, with what Justice Rehnquist characterized as “embarrassing candor,” as merely a “blurred, indistinct, and variable barrier,” which “is not wholly accurate” and can only be “dimly perceived.” Id. at 107 (quoting Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602, 614 (1971)). 17 the ‘callous indifference’ we have said was never intended by the Establishment Clause,” and “would bring us into ‘war with our national tradit…
Rule Authority · 3rd Cir.
McCollum v. Board of Educ., 333 U.S. 203, 212 , 68 S.Ct. 461, 466 , 92 L.Ed. 649 (1948) ("[A]s we said in the Everson case, the First Amendment has erected a wall between Church and State which must be kept high and impregnable.”); id. at 231 , 68 S.Ct. at 474 (Frankfurter, J., concurring) ("Separation means separation, not something less.
Frankfurter, J., concurring
Rule Authority · 11th Cir.
Thus, the district court states that, while the state may teach certain moral values, it cannot advance any reason for those values unless "the possible different reasons [are] explained evenhandedly," Smith, 655 F.Supp. at 987 , and finds that history may not be taught constitutionally in the schools unless the textbooks contain more references to the place of religion in history. 32 "Separation is a requirement to abstain from fusing functions of Government and religious s…
Frankfurter, J., concurring
Rule Authority · 11th Cir.
“Separation is a requirement to abstain from fusing functions of Government and religious sects, not merely to treat them all equally.” McCollum, 333 U.S. at 227 , 68 S.Ct. at 473 (Frankfurter, J., concurring), quoted in Abington, 374 U.S. at 219 , 83 S.Ct. at 1570 .
Frankfurter, J., concurring
Rule Authority · Haw. · 16 citations in this opinion
Id. at 205-06.
Rule Authority · N.J. · 2 citations in this opinion
McCollum v. Board of Educ., 333 U.S. 203, 212 , 68 S.Ct. 461, 465 , 92 L.Ed. 649, 659 (1948).
Rule Authority · Cal. · 2 citations in this opinion
The public school is “[d]esigned to serve as perhaps the most powerful agency for promoting cohesion among a heterogeneous democratic people . . . .” (McCollum v. Board of Education (1948) 333 U.S. 203, 216 [ 92 L.Ed. 649, 661 , 68 S.Ct. 461 , 2 A.L.R.2d 1338 ] (conc. opn. of Frankfurter, J.).) In other words, “ ‘[t]he public school is at once the symbol of our democracy and the most pervasive means of promoting our common destiny.
green People v. James D. (1987)
Rule Authority · Cal. · 2 citations in this opinion
Courts have long recognized the importance of education to both the individual and to society (see, e.g., Plyler v. Doe (1982) 457 U.S. 202, 221-222 [ 72 L.Ed.2d 786 , 102 S.Ct. 2382 ]; McCollum v. Board of Education (1948) 333 U.S. 203, 231 [ 92 L.Ed. 649, 661 , 68 S.Ct. 461 , 2 A.L.R.2d 1338 ] (Frankfurter, J., conc.)), and defendant does not question the propriety of the compulsory education laws (which, as noted, cover persons aged six to eighteen ) as a legitimate means…
Rule Authority · S.D. Iowa · 2 citations in this opinion
See, e.g., Zorach v. Clauson, 343 U.S. 306, 314 [ 72 S.Ct. 679, 684 , 96 L.Ed. 954 ] (1952); McCollum v. Board of Education, 333 U.S. 203, 211 [ 68 S.Ct. 461, 465 , 92 L.Ed. 649 ] (1948).
Quote Authority · E.D. Pa.
McCollum v. Bd. of Educ., 333 U.S. 203, 206 (1948); see also Donovan ex rel.
“We do note that parents independently have standing to bring constitutional challenges to the conditions in their children’s schools.”
Rule Authority · M.D. La.
McCollum v. Bd. of Educ., 333 U.S. 203, 206 (1948)). 142 Larson v. Valente, 456 U.S. 228, 244 (1982).
Rule Authority · N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div.
No. 71, 333 U.S. 203, 235 , 68 S.Ct. 461, 477 , 92 L.Ed. 649, 671 (1948) (Jackson, J. concurring), “If we are to eliminate everything that is objectionable to any [individual] ... we will leave public education in shreds.
Jackson, J. concurring
Rule Authority · N.D. Miss.
McCollum, 333 U.S. at 209-10 ,, 68 S.Ct. at 464 (emphasis added).
emphasis added
Rule Authority · D.N.J.
Lynch, 465 U.S. at 673 , 104 S.Ct. at 1359 (citing Zorach v. Clauson, 343 U.S. 306, 314-15 , 72 S.Ct. 679, 684 , 96 L.Ed. 954 (1952)); McCollum, 333 U.S. at 211, 68 S.Ct. at 465 .
Rule Authority · Cal. Ct. App.
McCollum v. Board of Education, 333 U.S. 203, 211 (1948).
Rule Authority · Cal. Ct. App.
McCollum, v. Board of Education, 333 U.S. 203, 231 (1948) (opinion of Frankfurter, J.).” (Edwards v. Aguillard, supra, 482 U.S. 578 at p. _ [96 L.Ed.2d at p. 519].) And, noting that in Marsh v. Chambers it had distinguished “Between adults not susceptible to ‘religious indoctrination’ and children subject to *1024 ‘peer pressure,’ ” the court reiterated its holding in Board of Education v. Barnette, supra, 319 U.S. at p. 637 [ 87 L.Ed. at p. 1637 ]: “That [Boards of Educatio…
opinion of Frankfurter, J.
Rule Authority · Or.
Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States 594, § 1877 (1851). 16 Abington School Dist. v. Schempp, 374 US 203 , 83 S Ct 1560 , 10 L Ed 2d 844 (1963); Engel v. Vitale, 370 US 421 , 82 S Ct 1261 , 8 L Ed 2d 601 (1962); McCollum v. Bd. of Ed., 333 US 203 , 68 S Ct 461 , 92 L Ed 649 (1948). 17 See Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 US 205 , 92 S Ct 1526 , 32 L Ed 2d 15 (1972)(compulsory high school attendance); West Virginia Bd. of Ed. v. Barnette, 319 US 624 , 63 S Ct 1…
Frankfurter, J., concurring