Home › Case briefs › Constitutional Law

Grand Rapids School District v. Ball

Supreme Court of the United States · 1985 · Constitutional Law

Constitutional LawEstablishment ClauseState Aid to Religious SchoolsEstablishment ClauseLemonprimary effectpervasively sectarianstate-paid teachers

Facts

Grand Rapids operated two publicly funded programs for nonpublic school students in classrooms leased from nonpublic schools, 40 of the 41 participating schools being religious schools. Shared Time offered supplemental daytime classes such as reading, math, art, music, and physical education, taught by public-school employees on the religious-school premises; Community Education offered after-school elective classes there as well. Community Education courses in the religious schools were virtually always taught by instructors otherwise employed full time by the same nonpublic school, and the same students who attended the religious school attended the publicly funded classes in that school. The classrooms used for the programs were inside the religious-school buildings, with only temporary signs marking them as public-school rooms and no public signs outside the buildings indicating public-school use.

Issue

Whether Grand Rapids' Shared Time and Community Education programs, which used public funds to provide instruction by public employees to nonpublic-school students in leased classrooms inside predominantly sectarian schools, had the unconstitutional effect of advancing religion in violation of the Establishment Clause.

Rule

Under the Establishment Clause, state action is measured by the Lemon criteria: it must have a secular purpose, its primary or principal effect must neither advance nor inhibit religion, and it must not foster excessive government entanglement with religion. Publicly funded instructional programs conducted inside pervasively sectarian elementary and secondary schools violate the effects prong when they create a substantial risk of state-sponsored religious indoctrination, symbolically link church and state in a manner likely perceived as governmental endorsement of religion, or provide direct and substantial aid to the sectarian enterprise by subsidizing the school's educational function.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

A public school district in Columbus, Ohio, creates a daytime enrichment program for students enrolled in private elementary schools. District-paid teachers teach reading and music in rooms inside church-run schools that the district leases for a nominal fee, and nearly all participating schools integrate religion throughout the school day.

Under the majority's reasoning, which is the strongest argument that the program violates the Establishment Clause?

Explanation. The majority accepted that such programs may have a secular purpose, but held that publicly funded instruction conducted inside pervasively sectarian elementary and secondary schools fails Lemon's effects prong when it creates a substantial risk of state-sponsored indoctrination, a symbolic union of church and state, and direct and substantial aid to the sectarian enterprise. Proof of actual indoctrination is not required, and temporary public-school labeling does not cure the constitutional defect. (Derived from Grand Rapids School District v. Ball (n.d.).)