Download Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 US 205 (1972). and more Study Guides, Projects, Research Religion in PDF only on Docsity!
WISCONSIN v. YODER
Syllabus
WISCONSIN v. YODER ET AL.
CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN
No. 70-110. Argued December 8, 1971-Decided May 15, 1972
Respondents, members of the Old OrO2r Amish religion and (^) the Conservative Amish Mennonite Church, were convicted of violat- ing Wisconsin's compulsory school-attendance law (which requires a child's school attendance until age 16) by declining to send their children to public or private school after they had graduated from the eighth grade. The evidence showed that the (^) Amish provide continuing informal vocational education to their children designed to prepare them for life (^) in the rural Amish community. The evidence also showed that (^) respondents sincerely believed that high school attendance (^) was contrary to the Amish religion and way of life and that (^) they would endanger their own salvation and that of their children by complying with the law. (^) The State Supreme Court sustained respondents' claim that application of the compulsory school-attendanc Jaw to (^) them violated their rights under the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment, made applicable to (^) the States by the Fourteenth Amendment. Held:
- The State's interest in universal education is not totally free from a balancing process when it impinges on other fundamental rights, such as those specifically protected by the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment and the traditional interest (^) of parents (^) with respect to the religious upbringing of their children. Pp. 213-215.
- Respondents have amply supported their claim that enforce- ment of the compulsory formal education requirement after (^) the eighth grade would gravely endanger if not destroy the free exer- cise of their religious beliefs. (^) Pp. 215-219.
- Aided by a history of three centuries as an identifiable (^) re- ligious sect and a long history (^) as a successful and self-sufficient segment of American society, the Amish have demonstrated the sincerity of their religious beliefs, (^) the inte.elationship of belief with their mode of life, the vital role that belief and daily con- duct play in the continuing (^) survival of Old Order Amish com- munities, and the hazards presented by the State's enforcement of a statute generally valid as to others. Beyond this, tiey have
OCTOBER TERM,^^1971
Syllabus 406 U.^ S.
carried the^ difficult^ burden^ of^ demonstrating^ the^ adequacy^ of^ their alternative mode^ of^ continuing^ informal vocational^ education^ in terms of the overall interests that the State relies on in support of its program^ of^ compulsory^ high^ school^ education.^ In^ light^ of this showing, and weighing the minimal difference between^ what the State would require and what the Amish already^ accept,^ it was incumbent on the State to show with more^ particularity^ how its admittedly strong interest in compulsory education^ would^ be adversely affected by granting an exemption to^ the^ Amish.^ Pp. 219-229, 234-236.
- The State's claim that it is empowered, as^ parens^ patriae, to extend the benefit of secondary education to children regardless of the wishes of their parents cannot be sustained against^ a^ free exercise claim of the nature revealed by this record, for the Amish have introduced convincing evidence^ that^ accommodating^ their^ re- ligious objections by forgoing one or two additional years^ of^ com- pulsory education will not impair the physical or mental health of the child, or result in an inability to be self-supporting or to discharge the duties and responsibilities of citizenship, or in any other way materially detract from the welfare of society. Pp. 229-234. 49Wis. 2d 430, 182 N. W. 2d 539, affirmed.
BURGER, C. J., delivered the opinion of^ the Court,^ in which^ BREN- NAN, STEWART, WHITE, MARSHALL, and BLACKMUN, JJ., joined. STEWART, J., filed a concurring opinion, in which BRENNAN, J., joined, post, p. :237. WHITE, J.,^ filed^ a^ concurring^ opinion,^ in^ which BRENNAN and STEWART, JJ., joined, post, p. 237. DOUGLAS, J., filed an opinion dissenting in^ part,^ post,^ p.^ 241.^ POWELL^ and REHNQUIST, JJ., took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.
John W. Calhoun, Assistant Attorney General of Wis-
consin, argued^ the^ cause^ for^ petitioner.^ With^ him^ on
the briefs were Robert W. Warren, Attorney General,
and William H. Wilker, Assistant Attorney^ General.
William B. Ball argued the cause for respondents.
With him on^ the^ brief^ was^ Jo8eph^ G.^ Skelly.
Briefs of amici curiae urging affirmance were^ filed^ by Donald E. Showalter for the Mennonite Central* Com-
OCTOBER TERM, 1971
Opinion of the Court 406 U. S.
On complaint of the school district administrator for
the public schools, respondents were charged, tried, and
convicted of violating (^) the compulsory-attendance law in Green (^) County Court and were fined the sum of $5 each.' Respondents (^) defended on the ground that the applica-
high school, any person having under his (^) control a child who is be- tween the ages of 7 and (^) 16 years shall cause such child to attend school (^) regularly during the full period and hours, religious holidays excepted, that the (^) public or private school in which such child should be enrolled is in session until the end of the school term, quarter (^) or semester of the school year in which he becomes 16 years of age.
"(3) This section does (^) not apply to any child who is not in proper physical or mental condition to attend school, to any child exempted for good cause by the school board of the district in which the child resides or to any child who has completed the full 4-year high school course. The certificate of a reputable (^) physician in general practice shall (^) be sufficient proof that a child is unable to attend school. "(4) Instruction during (^) the required period elsewhere than at school may be substituted for school attendance. Such instruction must be approved by the state superintendent as substantially equivalent to instruction given to children of like ages (^) in the public or private (^) schools where such children reside. "(5) Whoever violates this section (^)... may be fined not less than $5 nor more than $50 (^) or imprisoned not more than 3 months or both." Section 118.15 (1) (b) requires (^) attendance to age 18 in a school district containing a "vocational, 'technical and adult education school," but thi- section is concededly inapplicable in this case, for there is no (^) such school in the district involved. 3 Prior to trial, (^) the attorney for respondents wrote the State Superintendent (^) of Public Instruction in an effort to explore the possibilities for a compromise settlement. ° Among other possibilities, he suggested that perhaps the State Superintendent (^) could admin- istratively determine (^) that the Amish could satisfy the compulsory- attendance law by establishing their own (^) vocational training plan similar to one that has been established in Pennsylvania. Supp. App. 6. Under the Pennsylvania plan, Amish children of high school age are required (^) to attend an Amish vocational school for
WISCONSIN v. YODER
205 Opinion of the Court
tion of the compulsory-attendance law violated their rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments.' The trial testimony showed (^) that respondents believed, in accordance with the tenets of Old Order Amish communi- ties generally, that their children's attendance at high school, public or private, was contrary to the Amish reli- gion and way of life. They (^) believed that by sending their children to high school, they would not only expose them- selves to the danger of the censure (^) of the church com- munity, but, as found by the county (^) court, also endanger their own (^) salvation and that of their children. The State stipulated that respondents' religious beliefs were sincere. In support of their position, respondents presented as expert witnesses scholars on religion and (^) educa- tion whose testimony is uncontradicted. They ex- pressed their opinions on the relationship of the Amish belief concerning school attendance to the more general tenets of their religion, and described the impact that compulsory high school attendance could have on the continued survival of Amish communities as (^) they exist in the United States today. The history of the Amish
three hours a week, during which time they are taught such subjects as English, mathematics, (^) health, and social studies by an Amish teacher. For the balance of the week, the children perform farm and (^) household duties under parental supervision, and keep a journal of their daily activities. The major portion of the curriculum is home projects in agriculture and homemaking. See generally J. Hostetler & G. Huntington, Children in Amish Society: Socializa- tion and Community Education, c. 5 (1971). A similar program has been instituted (^) in Indiana. Ibid. See also Iowa Code § 299. (1971); Kan. Stat. Ann. § 72-1111 (Supp. 1971). The Superintendent rejected this proposal on the ground that it would not afford Amish children "substantially (^) equivalent educa- tion" to that offered in the schools of the area. Supp. App. 6. 'The First Amendment provides: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exer- cise thereof ......
WISCONSIN v. YODER
205 Opinion of the Court
are in marked variance with Amish values and the Amish way of life; they view secondary school education as an impermissible exposure of their children to a "worldly". influence in conflict with their beliefs. The high school tends to^ emphasize^ intellectual^ and^ scientific^ accomplish- ments, self-distinction, competitiveness, worldly success, and social life with other students. Amish society emphasizes informal learning-through-doing; a life of "goodness," (^) rather than (^) a life of intellect; (^) wisdom, (^) rather than technical knowledge; community^ welfare,^ rather than competition; and separation from, rather than in- tegration with, contemporary worldly society. Formal high school education beyond the eighth grade is contrary to Amish beliefs, not o nly because it places Amish children in an environment hostile to Amish be- liefs with increasing emphasis on competition in class work and sports and with pressure to conform to the styles, manners, and ways of the peer group, but also be- cause it takes them away from their community, physi- cally and emotionally, during the crucial and formative adolescent period of life. During this period, the children must acquire Amish attitudes favoring manual work and self-reliance and the specific skills needed to perform the adult role of an Amish farmer or housewife. They must learn to enjoy physical labor. Once a child has learned basic reading, writing, and elementary math- ematics, these traits, skills, and attitudes admittedly fall within the category of those best learned through example and ."doing" rather than in a classroom. And, at this time in life, the Amish child must also grow in his faith and his relationship to the Amish com- munity if he is to be prepared to accept the heavy obli- gations imposed by adult baptism. In short, high school attendance with teachers who are not of the Amish faith-and may even be hostile to it-interposes a seri- ous barrier to the integration of the Amish child into
OCTOBER TERM,^^1971
Opinion of^ the^ Court^406 U.^ S.
the Amish religious community. Dr. John Hostetler, one of the experts on Amish society, testified that the modern high school is not equipped, in curriculum or social environment, to impart the values promoted by Amish society. The Amish do not object to elementary education through the first eight grades^ as^ a^ general^ proposition because they agree^ that^ their^ children^ must^ have^ basic skills in the "three R's" in order to read the Bible, to be good farmers and citizens, and to be able to deal with non-Amish people when necessary in the course of daily affairs. They view such a basic education as acceptable because it does not significantly expose their children to worldly values or interfere with their development in the Amish community during the crucial adolescent period. While Amish accept compulsory elementary education generally, wherever possible they have estab- lished their own elementary schools in many respects like the small local schools of the past. In the Amish belief higher learning tends to develop values they reject as influences that alienate man from God. On the basis of such considerations, Dr. Hostetler tes- tified that compulsory high school attendance could not only result in great psychological harm to^ Amish^ chil- dren, because of the conflicts it would produce, but would also, in his opinion, ultimately result in the de- struction of the Old Order Amish church community as it exists in the United States today. The testimony of Dr. Donald A. Erickson, an expert witness on education, also showed that the Amish succeed in preparing their high school age children to be productive members of^ the Amish community. He described their system of learn- ing through doing the skills dirpctly^ relevant^ to^ their adult roles in the Amish community as "ideal" and per- haps superior to ordinary high school education. The evidence also showed that the Amish have an excellent
OCTOBER TERM, 1971
Opinion of the Court 406 U. S.
and education of their children in their early and form- ative years have a high place in our society. See also Ginsberg v. New York, 390 U. S. 629, 639 (1968) ; Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U. S. 390 (1923); cf. Rowan v. Post Office Dept., 397 U. S. 728 (1970). Thus, a State's inter- est in universal education, (^) however highly we rank it, is not totally free (^) from a balancing process when it impinges on fundamental rights and interests, such as those specifically protected by the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment, and the traditional interest of parents (^) with respect to the religious upbringing of their children so long as they, in the words of Pierce, (^) "prepare [them] for additional obligations." 268 U. S., at 535. It follows that in order for Wisconsin to compel school attendance beyond the eighth grade against a claim that such attendance interferes with the practice of a legitimate (^) religious belief, it must appear either that the State does not deny the free exercise of religious belief by its requirement, or that there is a state interest of sufficient magnitude to override the (^) interest claiming protection under the Free Exercise Clause. Long before there was general acknowledgment of the need for (^) uni- versal formal education, the Religion Clauses had spe- cifically and firmly fixed the right to free exercise of religious beliefs, and (^) buttressing this fundamental right was an equally firm, even if less explicit, prohibition against the establishment of any religion by government. The values (^) underlying these two provisions relating to religion have been zealously protected, sometimes even at the expense of other (^) interests of admittedly high social importance. The invalidation of financial aid to parochial schools by government grants (^) for a salary subsidy for teachers is but one example of the extent to which (^) courts have gone in this regard, notwithstanding that such aid programs were legislatively determined to be in the public interest and the service of sound ed- ucational policy by States and by Congress. Lemon v.
WISCONSIN v. YODER
205 Opinion of the Court
Kurtzman, 403 U. S. 602 (1971); Tilton (^) v. Richardson, 403 U. S. 672 (1971). See also Everson v. Board (^) of Education, 330 U. S. 1, 18 (1947). The essence of all that (^) has been said and written on the subject is that only those (^) interests of the highest order and those not otherwise served can overbalance legitimate claims (^) to the free exercise of religion. We can accept it as settled, therefore, that, (^) however strong the State's (^) interest in universal compulsory education, it is by no means absolute to the (^) exclusion or subordination of all other (^) interests. E. g., Sherbert v, Verner, 374 U. S. 398 (1963); McGowan (^) v. Maryland, 366 U. S. 420, 459 (1961) (^) (separate opinion of Frankfurter, J.); Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 U. S. 158, (^) 165" (1944).
II We come then (^) to the quality of the claims of the respondents concerning the alleged encroachment (^) of Wisconsin's compulsory school-attendance statute on their rights (^) and the rights of their children to the free exercise of the religious beliefs they and their (^) forebears have adhered to for almost three centuries. In evaluat- ing those claims we must be careful to determine whether the Amish religious faith and their (^) mode of life are, as they claim, inseparable (^) and interdependent. A way of life, however virtuous and admirable, may (^) not be inter- posed as a barrier to reasonable (^) state regulation of ed- ucation if it is based on purely secular considerations; to have the (^) protection of the Religion Clauses, the claims must be rooted in religious belief. Although a (^) deter- mination of what is a "religious" belief or practice entitled to constitutional protection may present (^) a most delicate question,' the very concept of ordered liberty (^) precludes
6 See Welsh v. United States, 398 U. S. 333, 351-361 (^) (1970) (Har- lan, J., concurring (^) in result); United States v. Ballard, 322 U. S. 78 (1944).
WISCONSIN v. YODER
(^205) Opinion of the Court
spondents freely concede, (^) and indeed assert as an article of faith, that their (^) religious beliefs and what we would today call "life (^) style" have not altered in fundamentals for centuries. (^) Their way of life in a church-oriented community, separated from (^) the outside world and "worldly" influences, (^) their attachment (^) to nature (^) and (^) the soil, is a way inherently simple and uncomplicated, (^) albeit difficult to preserve against the pressure (^) to conform. Their rejection of telephones, (^) automobiles, radios, and television, their mode of (^) dress, of speech, their habits of manual work do indeed set (^) them apart from much of contemporary society; these customs (^) are both symbolic
and practical. As the society (^) around the Amish has become (^) more populous, (^) urban, industrialized, and complex, (^) particu- larly in this century, government, (^) regulation of human affairs (^) has correspondingly become more (^) detailed and pervasive. (^) The Amish mode of life has (^) thus come into conflict (^) increasingly with requirements (^) of contempo- rary society (^) exerting a hydraulic insistence (^) on conformity to majoritarian standards. (^) So long as compulsory edu- cation laws were (^) confined to eight grades of elementary basic education (^) imparted in a nearby rural schoolhouse, with (^) a large proportion of students of (^) the Amish faith, the (^) Old Order Amish had little basis (^) to fear that school attendance would (^) expose their children to the worldly influence they (^) reject. But modern compulsory second- ary education in rural (^) areas is now largely carried on in (^) a consolidated school, (^) often remote from the student's home (^) and alien to his daily home life. (^) As the record so strongly shows, the (^) values and programs of the modern secondary school are (^) in sharp conflict with the funda- mental mode of life mandated by the Amish (^) religion; modern laws requiring (^) compulsory secondary education have accordingly (^) engendered great concern (^) and conflict.^8
OCTOBER TERM, 1971
Opinion of the Court 406 U. S.
The conclusion is inescapable that secondary schooling, by exposing Amish children to worldly influences in terms of attitudes, goals, (^) and values contrary to beliefs, and by
substantially interfering with the religious development of the Amish child and his integration (^) into the way of life of the Amish faith community at the crucial adoles- cent stage of development, contravenes the basic re- ligious tenets and practice of the Amish faith, both (^) as to (^) the parent/ and the child. The impact of the compulsory-attendance law on re- spondents' practice of the Amish religion (^) is not only severe, but inescapable, for the Wisconsin law affirma- tively compels them, under threat of criminal sanction, to perform acts undeniably at odds with fundamental tenets of their religious beliefs. See Braunfeld v. Brown, 366 U. S. 599, 605 (1961). Nor is the impact of the compul- sory-attendance law confined to grave interference with important Amish religious tenets from a subjective point of view. It carries with it precisely the kind of ob-
jective danger to the free exercise of religion that the
First Amendment was designed to prevent. As the record shows, compulsory school attendance to age 16 for Amish children carries with it a very real threat of undermining the Amish community and religious prac- tice as they exist today; they must either abandon belief and be assimilated (^) into society at large, or be forced to migrate to some other and more tolerant region.^9
9 Some States have developed working arrangements with the Amish regarding high school attendance. See n. 3, supra. How- ever, the danger to the continued existence of an ancient religious faith cannot be ignored simply because of the assumption that its adherents will continue to be able, at considerable sacrifice, to relo- cate in some more tolerant State or country or work out accommo- dations under threat of criminal prosecution. Forced migration of religious minorities was an evil that lay at the heart of the Re- ligion Clauses. See, e. g., Everson v. Board of Education, 330 U. S. 1, 9-10 (1947); Madison, Memorial and Remonstrance Against
OCTOBER TERM, (^1971)
Opinion of the Court 4C6 U. S.
religiously grounded conduct is always outside the pro- tection of the Free Exercise Clause. It is true that activities of individuals, even when religiously based, are often subject to regulation by the States in the exercise of their undoubted power to promote the health, safety, and general welfare, or the Federal Government in the exercise of its delegated powers. See, e. g., Gillette v. United States, (^401) U. S. 437 (1971); Braunfeld v. Brown, 366 U. S. 599 (1961); Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 U. S. 158 (1944); Reynolds v. United States, 98 U. S. 145 (1879). But to agree that religiously grounded conduct must often be subject to (^) the broad police power of the State is not to deny that there are areas of conduct pro- tected by the Free Exercise Clause (^) of the First Amend- ment (^) and thus beyond the power of the State to control, even under regulations of general applicability. E. g., Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U. S. 398 (1963); (^) Murdock v. Pennsylvania, 319 U. S. 105 .(1943); (^) Cantwell v. Con- necticut, 310 U. S. 296, 303-304 (1940). This case, therefore, does not (^) become easier because respondents were convicted for their "actions" in refusing to send their children to the public high (^) school; in this context belief and action cannot be (^) neatly confined in logic-tight compartments. Cf. Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U. S.. at
Nor can this case be disposed (^) of on the grounds that Wisconsin's (^) requirement for school attendance to age 16 applies uniformly to all citizens of the State (^) and does not, on its face, discriminate against religions or a par- ticular religion, or that it is motivated by legitimate secular concerns. (^) A regulation neutral on its face may, in its application, nonetheless offend the constitutional requirement for governmental neutrality (^) if it unduly burdens the free exercise of religion. Sherbert v. Vernei, supra; cf. Walz v. Tax Commission, 397 U. S. 664 (1970). The Court must not ignore (^) the danger that an exception
WISCONSIN v. YODER
205 Opinion of the (^) Court
from a general obligation of citizenship on (^) religious grounds may run afoul of the Establishment Clause, but that danger cannot be allowed (^) to prevent any exception no (^) matter how vital it may be to the protection of values promoted by the right of free exercise. By preserving doctrinal flexibility (^) and recognizing the need for a sensi- ble and realistic application of the Religion Clauses "we have been able to chart (^) a course that preserved the autonomy and freedom of religious bodies while avoiding any semblance of established religion. This is a 'tight rope' and one we have successfully traversed." Walz v. Tax Commission, supra, at
We turn, then, to the (^) State's broader contention that its (^) interest in its system of compulsory education is so compelling that even the established religious practices of the Amish must give way. Where fundamental claims of religious (^) freedom are at stake, however, we cannot accept such a sweeping claim; despite (^) its admitted va- lidity in the generality of cases, (^) we must searchingly examine the interests that the State seeks to (^) promote by its requirement (^) for compulsory education to age 16, and the impediment (^) to those objectives that would flow from recognizing the claimed Amish exemption. See, e. g., Sherbert *v. Verner, supra; Martin v. (^) City of Struthers, (^) 319 U. S. 141 (1943); Schneider v. State, 308 U. S. 147 (1939). The State advances two primary arguments in support of its (^) system of compulsory education. It notes; as Thomas Jefferson pointed out early in our history, that some degree of education is necessary to (^) prepare citizens to participate effectively and intelligently in our open political system if we are to preserve freedom and inde- pendence. Further, (^) education prepares individuals to be self-reliant and self-sufficient participants in society. We accept these (^) propositions.
WISCONSIN v. YODER
205 Opinion of the Court
It is neither fair nor correct to suggest that the Amish
are opposed to education beyond the eighth grade level.
What this record shows is that they are opposed to con-
ventional formal education of the type provided by a
certified high school because it comes at the child's crucial
adolescent period of religious development. Dr. Donald
Erickson, for example, testified that their system of learn-
ing-by-doing was an "ideal system" of education in terms
of preparing Amish children for life as adults in the
Amish community, and that "I would be inclined to say
they do a better job in this than most of the rest of us
do." As he put it, "These people aren't purporting to be
learned people, and it seems to me the self-sufficiency
of the community is the best evidence I can point to-
whatever is being done seems to function well." 12
We must not forget that in the Middle Ages important
values of the civilization of the Western World were pre-
served by members of religious orders who isolated them-
selves from all worldly influences against great obstacles.
There can be no assumption that today's majority is
to waive them, provided the Secretary finds that the sect makes reasonable provision for its dependent members. The history of the exemption shows it was enacted with the (^) situation of the Old Order Amish specifically in view. H. R. Rep. No. 213, 89th Cong., 1st Sess., 101-102 (1965). The record in this case establishes without contradiction that the Green County Amish had never been known to commit crimes, that none had been known to receive public assistance, and that none were unemployed. 12 Dr. Erickson had previously written: (^) "Many public educators would be elated if their programs were as successful in preparing students for productive community life as the Amish (^) system seems to be. In fact, while some public schoolmen strive to outlaw the Amish approach, others are being forced to emulate many of its features." Erickson, Showdown at an Amish Schoolhouse: A De- scription and Analysis of the Iowa Controversy, in Public Controls for Nonpublic Schools 15, 53 (D. Erickson ed. 1969). And see Littell, supra, n. 5, at 61.
OCTOBER TERM, 1971
Opinion of the Court 406 U. S.
"right" and the (^) Amish and others (^) like them are (^) "wrong."
A way of life that is odd or^ even^ erratic^ but^ interferes
with no rights^ or^ interests^ of^ others^ is^ not^ to^ be^ con- demned because it is different. The State, however,^ supports^ its interest^ in^ provid- ing an additional one or two years of compulsory high
school education to^ Amish^ children^ because^ of^ the^ possi- bility that some such children will choose to leave the Amish community, and that if this occurs they will be ill-equipped for life. The State argues that if Amish children leave their church they should not be in the position of making their way in the world without the education available in the one or two additional years the State requires. However, on this record, that argu- ment is highly speculative. There is no specific evi- dence of the loss of Amish adherents by attrition, nor is there any showing that upon leaving the Amish com- munity Amish children, with their practical agricultural training and habits of industry and self-reliance, would become burdens on society because of educational short- comings. Indeed, this argument of the State appears to rest primarily on the State's mistaken assump- tion, already noted, that the Amish do not provide any education for their children beyond the eighth grade, but allow them to grow in "ignorance." To the contrary, not only do the Amish accept the necessity for formal schooling through the eighth grade^ level,^ but continue to provide what has been characterized by the undisputed testimony of expert educators as an "ideal" vocational education for their children in the adolescent years. There is nothing in this record to suggest that the Amish qualities of reliability, self-reliance, and dedication to work would fail to find ready markets in today's soci- ety. Absent sonde contrary evidence supporting the
