Edwards v. Aguillard
Edwards v. Aguillard was a landmark Supreme Court case decided in 1987 that addressed the contentious issue of teaching evolution and creationism in public schools. The case arose from a Louisiana statute that mandated schools to teach creationism alongside evolution, a move seen by many as an attempt to promote a specific religious viewpoint in the science curriculum. Challenged by Principal Don Aguillard and supported by the American Civil Liberties Union, the case reached the Supreme Court, where it was evaluated under the Lemon test, which assesses the constitutionality of laws related to religion.
In a 7-2 decision, the Court ruled that the Louisiana law violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, asserting that its primary purpose was to advance a religious doctrine rather than to enhance educational curriculum. The majority opinion emphasized that teachers already had the freedom to present various theories about the origins of life, thereby rejecting the state's justification for imposing creationism in education. The dissenting opinion highlighted concerns about focusing on the intent of the law rather than its effects. Overall, Edwards v. Aguillard has significant implications for the ongoing debate over educational standards, religious freedom, and the separation of church and state in the United States.
Edwards v. Aguillard
Date: June 19, 1987
Citation: 482 U.S. 578
Issue: Establishment of religion
Significance: The Supreme Court struck down a state law requiring balanced treatment of “evolution science” and “creation science,” based on the establishment clause of the First Amendment.
In Epperson v. Arkansas (1968), the Supreme Court infuriated many religious groups when it overturned a state law that prohibited the teaching of Darwinian evolution in the public schools. A Louisiana statute, designed to get around the ruling, prohibited schools from teaching evolutionary theory unless the theories of creationism were also taught. Proponents of the statute argued that evolutionary theory is an integral part of the religion of secular humanism and asserted that creationism is a respectable scientific theory. Principal Don Aguillard, supported by the American Civil Liberties Union, challenged the constitutionality of the law.
By a 7-2 vote, the Court agreed with the challengers. Applying the three-part Lemon test (established in Lemon v. Kurtzman, 1971), Justice William J. Brennan, Jr., emphasized that the purpose of the statute was to restructure the science curriculum in conformity with a viewpoint associated with particular religious sects. Rejecting the academic freedom defense, Brennan noted that science teachers in Louisiana already enjoyed the freedom to teach a variety of theories about the origins of life. In dissent, Justice Antonin Scalia criticized the majority for looking at the intent rather than the effect of the statute, and he also argued against the portion of Lemon requiring a secular purpose for statutes.