Segraves v. California

Last updated
Segraves v. State of California
Court Superior Court of California, County of Sacramento
Full case nameKasey Segraves, Jason Segraves and Kevin Segraves, minors under 14 years of age, by their Guardian ad litem, Kelly Segraves, William Dannemeyer, Michael D. Antonovich, Eugene N. Ragle and Creation Science Research Center, Plaintiffs, v. State of California, Board of Education of the State of California, Department of Education of the State of California, Department of General Services, Wilson Riles, Kenneth Cory, Jessie Unruh and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendants.
Decided 1981

Segraves v. California was a 1981 Superior Court of California case concerning the teaching of evolutionary biology in public schools. Kelly Segraves, parent of three schoolchildren, sued the State of California, arguing that the teaching of evolution in public schools violated the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The judge rejected this claim and found that California's anti-dogmatism policy gave sufficient accommodation to the views of Segraves.

Evolutionary biology Study of the processes that produced the diversity of life

Evolutionary biology is the subfield of biology that studies the evolutionary processes that produced the diversity of life on Earth, starting from a single common ancestor. These processes include natural selection, common descent, and speciation.

The Free Exercise Clause accompanies the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause together read:

First Amendment to the United States Constitution Law guaranteeing freedom of speech, religion, assembly, press and petitions and prohibiting establishment of an official religion

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution prevents the government from making laws which respect an establishment of religion, prohibit the free exercise of religion, or abridge the freedom of speech, the freedom of the press, the right to peaceably assemble, or the right to petition the government for redress of grievances. It was adopted on December 15, 1791, as one of the ten amendments that constitute the Bill of Rights.

Contents

Background

Kelly Segraves is a father of three and cofounder of the Creation-Science Research Center in San Diego. His three children, Kasey, Jason, and Kevin, attended a California public school, where part of the curriculum included the teachings of evolution. Segraves contended that the teaching of religion at his children's public school violated their freedom to practice religion, and thus, infringed upon their First Amendment rights. [1] Segraves sued California on behalf of his three children, who were minors at the time, on January 19, 1979. [1] Cited in Segraves's complaint is the curriculum guide "Science Framework for California Public Schools," which is said to convey the idea that "the theory of evolution is the only credible theory of the origin of [life]." [2]

San Diego City in California, United States

San Diego is a city in the U.S. state of California. It is in San Diego County, on the coast of the Pacific Ocean in Southern California, approximately 120 miles (190 km) south of Los Angeles and immediately adjacent to the border with Mexico.

The case went to trial in 1981, putting evolution and creationism on opposite sides of another courtroom battle. In court, Segraves argued that teaching the theory of evolution in public schools was "'indoctrination' and 'coercion'" against his and his children's religious beliefs and that it violated their right to religious freedom. [2] The plaintiff also argued that teaching the evolutionary theory in public schools established and supported "the religion of secular humanism," which violates the First Amendment's establishment clause. [2] Because of this assertion, Segraves also claimed that teaching evolution goes against a section of the California constitution that outlaws the spending of public money for the support of any religion in public schools. [2]

In United States law, the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, together with that Amendment's Free Exercise Clause, form the constitutional right of freedom of religion. The relevant constitutional text is: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...".

Decision

In March 1981, after one week of testimony, presiding Judge Irving Perluss ruled that the teaching of evolution in public schools did not infringe upon the First Amendment rights of Segraves and his children. [1] Perluss's decision included a reference to a 1972 "anti-dogmatism" policy, which states:

"The decision states that the anti-dogmatism policy should be made known to any organization or person who would receive the Science Framework for California Public Schools." [2]

The decision states that the anti-dogmatism policy should be made known to any organization or person who would receive the Science Framework for California Public Schools. [1]

Related Research Articles

Edwards v. Aguillard, 482 U.S. 578 (1987), was a United States Supreme Court case concerning the constitutionality of teaching creationism. The Court considered a Louisiana law requiring that where evolutionary science was taught in public schools, creation science must also be taught. The Court ruled that this law violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment because the law was specifically intended to advance a particular religion. It also held that "teaching a variety of scientific theories about the origins of humankind to school children might be validly done with the clear secular intent of enhancing the effectiveness of science instruction."

Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421 (1962), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled that it is unconstitutional for state officials to compose an official school prayer and encourage its recitation in public schools.

Epperson v. Arkansas, 393 U.S. 97 (1968), was a United States Supreme Court case that invalidated an Arkansas statute that prohibited the teaching of human evolution in the public schools. The Court held that the First Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits a state from requiring, in the words of the majority opinion, "that teaching and learning must be tailored to the principles or prohibitions of any religious sect or dogma." The Supreme Court declared the Arkansas statute unconstitutional because it violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. After this decision, some jurisdictions passed laws that required the teaching of creation science alongside evolution when evolution was taught. These were also ruled unconstitutional by the Court in the 1987 case Edwards v. Aguillard.

"Separation of church and state" is paraphrased from Thomas Jefferson and used by others in expressing an understanding of the intent and function of the Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution which reads: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

Everson v. Board of Education, 330 U.S. 1 (1947), was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court which applied the Establishment Clause in the country's Bill of Rights to State law. Prior to this decision, the First Amendment's words, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" imposed limits only on the federal government, while many states continued to grant certain religious denominations legislative or effective privileges. This was the first Supreme Court case incorporating the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment as binding upon the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The decision in Everson marked a turning point in the interpretation and application of disestablishment law in the modern era.

Creation–evolution controversy The ongoing cultural, political, and theological dispute about the development and diversity of life on Earth

The creation–evolution controversy involves an ongoing, recurring cultural, political, and theological dispute about the origins of the Earth, of humanity, and of other life. Creationism was once widely believed to be true, but since the mid-19th century evolution by natural selection has been established as an empirical scientific fact.

Teach the Controversy Discovery Institute campaign to promote a variant of traditional creationism, intelligent design

"Teach the Controversy" is a campaign, conducted by the Discovery Institute, to promote the pseudoscientific principle of intelligent design, a variant of traditional creationism, while attempting to discredit the teaching of evolution in United States public high school science courses. The campaign claims that fairness and equal time require educating students with a 'critical analysis of evolution' where "the full range of scientific views", evolution's "unresolved issues", and the "scientific weaknesses of evolutionary theory" will be presented and evaluated alongside intelligent design concepts like irreducible complexity presented as a scientific argument against evolution through oblique references to books by design proponents listed in the bibliography of the Institute-proposed "Critical Analysis of Evolution" lesson plans.

Zelman v. Simmons-Harris, 536 U.S. 639 (2002), was a 5-4 decision of the United States Supreme Court that upheld an Ohio program that used school vouchers. The Court decided that the program did not violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment even if the vouchers could be used for private, religious schools.

McLean v. Arkansas Board of Education, 529 F. Supp. 1255, was a 1981 legal case in the US state of Arkansas.

<i>Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District</i> legal case

Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 400 F. Supp. 2d 707 was the first direct challenge brought in the United States federal courts testing a public school district policy that required the teaching of intelligent design. In October 2004, the Dover Area School District of York County, Pennsylvania changed its biology teaching curriculum to require that intelligent design be presented as an alternative to evolution theory, and that Of Pandas and People, a textbook advocating intelligent design, was to be used as a reference book. The prominence of this textbook during the trial was such that the case is sometimes referred to as the Dover Panda Trial, a name which recalls the popular name of the Scopes Monkey Trial in Tennessee, 80 years earlier. The plaintiffs successfully argued that intelligent design is a form of creationism, and that the school board policy violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The judge's decision sparked considerable response from both supporters and critics.

Intelligent design in politics

The intelligent design movement has conducted an organized campaign largely in the United States that promotes a pseudoscientific, neo-creationist religious agenda calling for broad social, academic and political changes centering on intelligent design.

<i>Daniel v. Waters</i>

Daniel v. Waters, 515 F.2d 485 was a 1975 legal case in which the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit struck down Tennessee's law regarding the teaching of "equal time" of evolution and creationism in public school science classes because it violated the Establishment clause of the US Constitution.

<i>Selman v. Cobb County School District</i>

Selman v. Cobb County School District, 449 F.3d 1320, was a United States court case in Cobb County, Georgia involving a sticker placed in public school biology textbooks. The sticker was a disclaimer stating that "Evolution is a theory, not a fact, concerning the origin of living things." The plaintiffs were parents of children in Cobb County schools who claimed the sticker violated both the Establishment Clause of the United States Constitution and the separation of church and state clause in the Georgia State Constitution because its purpose and effect was to cast doubt on the scientific consensus regarding evolutionary theory in order to promote religious beliefs in the schools.

<i>Willoughby v. Stever</i>

Willoughby v. Stever, 504 F.2d 271 was a 1973 American legal decision in a case brought by evangelist William Willoughby against the National Science Foundation director H. Guyford Stever and the Board of Regents of the University of Colorado for using taxpayer money to fund textbooks developed by the Biological Sciences Curriculum Study (BSCS) because they included evolution instruction. Willoughby claimed the pro-evolution curriculum was by extension also promoting secular humanism as the "official religion of the United States," and thus violated the Establishment clause of the US Constitution. Willoughby accused scientists of "intellectual snobbery", and opposed tax revenues going to support education offensive to his religious views. He argued that creationist education should be given the same tax payer funding as evolution education.

<i>Wright v. Houston Independent School District</i>

Wright v. Houston Independent School District, 486 F.2d 137 was an American legal case brought by a parent of a student in the Houston Independent School District in Houston, Texas suing on behalf of her daughter and fellow students to prevent the district from teaching evolution as fact and without reference to alternative theories. The plaintiffs claimed evolutionary theory endorsed a secularist religious view, and argued the school's failure to incorporate the teaching of a particular religious alternative to evolutionary theory as derived from the Bible's creation account held that religious view up to ridicule and contempt. To allow evolution while avoiding creationism was unconstitutional, the suit claimed, because it advanced one particular sectarian view over another. The plaintiffs maintained that the school's evolutionary teaching constituted "the establishment of a sectarian, atheistic religion" and was an interference of their own rights to the free exercise of religion as guaranteed by the Establishment clause in the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. The case is one of a series of legal battles over the teaching of evolution in American public schools, and the first to be initiated by opponents of such teaching.

<i>Freiler v. Tangipahoa Parish Board of Education</i>

Freiler v. Tangipahoa Parish Board of Education, 185 F.3d 337 was United States federal court case on the constitutionality of a policy requiring teachers to read aloud a disclaimer whenever they taught about evolution.

<i>Webster v. New Lenox School District</i>

Webster v. New Lenox School District, 917 F.2d 1004 was a court case in Illinois, in which a social studies teacher Ray Webster sued the New Lenox School District 122 in New Lenox, Illinois, which he accused of violating his First Amendment right to free speech for stopping him from teaching "creation science" in class. The court found however that the school district had a right to restrict Webster to teaching the specified curriculum, and that in any case the teaching of "creation science" was illegal, having been ruled to violate the establishment clause in the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Edwards v. Aguillard, 482 U.S. 578 (1987).

History of the creation–evolution controversy

The creation–evolution controversy has a long history. In response to theories developed by scientists, some religious individuals and organizations questioned the legitimacy of scientific ideas that contradicted the literal interpretation of the creation account in Genesis. Interpretation of the Judeo-Christian Bible had long been the prerogative of an orthodox priesthood able to understand Latin who traditionally held that Genesis was not meant to be read literally and taught it as an allegory. With the advent of the printing press, the translation of the Bible into other languages, and wider literacy, sundry and more literal understandings of scripture flourished. This allowed some religious persons and groups to challenge scientists who supported evolution, such as biologists Thomas Henry Huxley and Ernst Haeckel.

In Stone v. Graham, 449 U.S. 39 (1980), the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that a Kentucky statute was unconstitutional and in violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, because it lacked a nonreligious, legislative purpose. The statute required the posting of a copy of the Ten Commandments on the wall of each public classroom in the state. While the copies of the Ten Commandments were purchased with private funding, the Court ruled that because they were being placed in public classrooms they were in violation of the First Amendment.

In American schools, the Genesis creation narrative was generally taught as the origin of the universe and of life until Darwin's scientific theories became widely accepted in the late 1800s. While there was some immediate backlash, organized opposition did not get underway until the Fundamentalist–Modernist Controversy broke out following World War I; several states passed laws banning the teaching of evolution while others debated them but did not pass them. The Scopes Trial was the result of a challenge to the law in Tennessee. Scopes lost his case, and further states passed laws banning the teaching of evolution.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 "Segraves et al. v. State of California et al." National Center for Science Education.
  2. 1 2 3 4 5 Flygare, Thomas J. (1981). "The Case of Segraves V. State of California". The Phi Delta Kappan. 63 (2): 98–99. JSTOR   20386194.