Agostini v. Felton
Agostini v. Felton is a significant Supreme Court case decided in 1997, which reexamined the relationship between government aid and religious institutions. This case arose after a previous ruling, Aguilar v. Felton, which had struck down a program allowing public school teachers to provide educational services in private religious schools, citing concerns about governmental endorsement of religion. In Agostini, a narrow 5-4 majority reversed this decision, with Justice Sandra Day O'Connor leading the opinion that emphasized an interpretation of the Lemon test that favored a more accommodative approach to church-state relations. The majority argued that the presence of public employees in parochial schools did not equate to state-sponsored religious indoctrination. However, dissenting voices, including Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, cautioned against the inherent challenges of distinguishing between secular and religious education in such settings. The ruling reflects ongoing debates about the boundaries of governmental support for education in religious contexts and the principles of separation of church and state. This case is often cited in discussions about the evolving interpretations of constitutional protections regarding religion in American public life.
Subject Terms
Agostini v. Felton
Date: June 23, 1997
Citation: 521 U.S. ‗‗‗, 117 S.Ct. 1997
Issue: Establishment of religion
Significance: The Supreme Court held that the establishment clause did not prevent the use of public funds for sending public school teachers into parochial schools to provide remedial services.
In Aguilar v. Felton (1985), the Supreme Court voted five to four to strike down a program in which public school teachers went to private schools to provide a variety of secular services for disadvantaged students. Emphasizing the separationist viewpoint, the majority explained that the program might convey a message of governmental endorsement of religion. After Aguilar, New York continued the program by providing remedial services in parked vans near the private schools. In 1995 the parents of affected students went to federal court asking for the reversal of Aguilar, which appeared inconsistent with several recent decisions.
In Agostini v. Felton, a 5-4 majority of the justices agreed with the petitioners and overturned Aguilar. Using an interpretation of the Lemon test (developed in Lemon v. Kurtzman, 1971) that favored accommodationists, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor argued that the placing of public employees in parochial schools did not result in any state-sponsored indoctrination nor did it constitute any symbolic union between government and religion. In dissent, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg argued that it was impossible to draw a clear line between religious and secular instruction in religious schools.