Silverman v. Campbell

Last updated
Silverman v. Campbell, et al.
Court South Carolina Supreme Court
Full case nameHerb Silverman v. Carol A. Campbell, et al.
ArguedOctober 3, 1996 1996
DecidedMay 27, 1997 1997
Citation(s)326 S.C. 208 (1997) 486 S.E.2d 1
Holding
The Court held that the Constitution of South Carolina articles requiring belief in a supreme being to be in violation of the First Amendment and the No Religious Test Clause of the U. S. Constitution [1]
Court membership
Chief judge Ernest A. Finney, Jr. [2]
Associate judges Jean Toal, James E. Moore, John H. Waller, E. C. Burnett, III
Case opinions
MajorityFinney
ConcurrenceToal, Moore, Waller, Burnett
Laws applied
Article VI, section 3 of the U.S. Constitution

Silverman v. Campbell was a South Carolina Supreme Court case regarding the constitutionality of a provision in the South Carolina Constitution requiring an oath to God for employment in the public sector.

Contents

Details

In 1992, Herb Silverman was a mathematics professor at the College of Charleston who applied to become a notary public. Silverman had earlier run for the post of Governor of South Carolina. Silverman declared himself an Atheist but also joined a Unitarian Church. [3] [4] His application was rejected after he crossed off the phrase "So help me God" [5] from the oath, which was required by the South Carolina State Constitution. [6] Silverman filed a lawsuit naming Governor Carroll Campbell and Secretary of State Jim Miles as defendants. [7] After a lower court made a ruling in favor of Silverman, the state appealed to the Supreme Court contending that the case was not about religion. [8]

The South Carolina Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision, [2] ruled that Article VI, section 2 and Article XVII, section 4 of the South Carolina Constitutionboth of which state, "No person who denies the existence of a Supreme Being shall hold any office under this Constitution" [1] could not be enforced because they violated the First Amendment protection of free exercise of religion and the Article VI, section 3 of the United States Constitution banning the use of a religious test for public office. [9] Current precedent holds that these provisions are binding on the states under the 14th Amendment.[ citation needed ]

Herb Silverman in 2018. President Emeritus of the Secular Coalition for America, and a former board member of the American Humanist Association. Herb Silverman - SCA Founder.jpg
Herb Silverman in 2018. President Emeritus of the Secular Coalition for America, and a former board member of the American Humanist Association.

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Charles Pinckney (governor)</span> American politician (1757-1824)

Charles Pinckney was an American Founding Father, planter, and politician who was a signer of the United States Constitution. He was elected and served as the 37th governor of South Carolina, later serving two more non-consecutive terms. He also served as a U.S. Senator and a member of the House of Representatives. He was first cousin once removed of fellow signer Charles Cotesworth Pinckney.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Governor of South Carolina</span> Head of state and of government of the U.S. state of South Carolina

The governor of South Carolina is the head of government of South Carolina. The governor is the ex officio commander-in-chief of the National Guard when not called into federal service. The governor's responsibilities include making yearly "State of the State" addresses to the South Carolina General Assembly, submitting an executive budget, and ensuring that state laws are enforced.

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, due to violation of the First Amendment. The ruling has been the subject of intense debate.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">American Atheists</span> Organization

American Atheists is a non-profit organization in the United States dedicated to defending the civil liberties of atheists and advocating complete separation of church and state. It provides speakers for colleges, universities, clubs, and the news media. It also publishes books and American Atheist Magazine.

Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow, 542 U.S. 1 (2004), was a case decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. The lawsuit, originally filed as Newdow v. United States Congress, Elk Grove Unified School District, et al. in 2000, led to a 2002 ruling by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit that the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance are an endorsement of religion and therefore violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The words had been added by a 1954 act of Congress that changed the phrase "one nation indivisible" into "one nation under God, indivisible". After an initial decision striking the congressionally added "under God", the superseding opinion on denial of rehearing en banc was more limited, holding that compelled recitation of the language by school teachers to students was invalid.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Michael Newdow</span> American attorney and emergency medicine physician

Michael Arthur Newdow is an American attorney and emergency medicine physician. He is best known for his efforts to have recitations of the current version of the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools in the United States declared unconstitutional because of its inclusion of the phrase "under God". He also filed and lost a lawsuit to stop the invocation prayer at President Bush's second inauguration and in 2009 he filed a lawsuit to prevent references to God and religion from being part of President Obama's inauguration.

"Separation of church and state" is a metaphor 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..."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Blaine Amendment</span> Failed amendment to the United States Constitution

The Blaine Amendment was a failed amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would have prohibited direct government aid to educational institutions that have a religious affiliation. Most state constitutions already had such provisions, and thirty-eight of the fifty states have clauses that prohibit taxpayer funding of religious entities in their state constitutions.

The No Religious Test Clause of the United States Constitution is a clause within Article VI, Clause 3: "The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States." It immediately follows a clause requiring all federal and state office holders to take an oath or affirmation to support the Constitution. This clause contains the only explicit reference to religion in the original seven articles of the U.S. Constitution.

Torcaso v. Watkins, 367 U.S. 488 (1961), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court reaffirmed that the United States Constitution prohibits states and the federal government from requiring any kind of religious test for public office, in this specific case as a notary public.

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...

The Constitution of the State of North Carolina governs the structure and function of the state government of North Carolina, one of the United States; it is the highest legal document for the state and subjugates North Carolina law. All U.S. state constitutions are, according to the United States Supreme Court, subject to federal judicial review; any provision can be nullified if it, in the view of a majority of the Justices of the Supreme Court, constituted from time to time, conflicts with the US Constitution or any federal law pursuant to the Constitution, even if the identical language was previously upheld as valid by the court.

The Constitution of the State of South Carolina is the governing document of the U.S. state of South Carolina. It describes the structure and function of the state's government. The current constitution took effect on December 4, 1895. South Carolina has had six other constitutions, which were adopted in 1669, 1776, 1778, 1790, 1865 and 1868.

The Pledge of Allegiance of the United States has been criticized on several grounds. Its use in government funded schools has been the most controversial, as critics contend that a government-sanctioned endorsement of religion violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Arguments against the pledge include that the pledge itself is incompatible with democracy and freedom, that it is a form of nationalistic indoctrination, that pledges of allegiance are features of totalitarian states such as Nazi Germany, and that the pledge was written to honor Christopher Columbus and to sell flags.

Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398 (1963), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment required the government to demonstrate both a compelling interest and that the law in question was narrowly tailored before it denied unemployment compensation to someone who was fired because her job requirements substantially conflicted with her religion.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Discrimination against atheists</span> Persecution of and discrimination against people identified as atheists

Discrimination against atheists, both at present and historically, includes persecution of and discrimination against people who are identified as atheists. Discrimination against atheists may also comprise negative attitudes, prejudice, hostility, hatred, fear, or intolerance towards atheists and atheism. Because atheism can be defined in various ways, those discriminated against or persecuted on the grounds of being atheists might not have been considered atheists in a different time or place. Thirteen Muslim countries officially punish atheism or apostasy by death and Humanists International asserts that "the overwhelming majority" of the 193 member states of the United Nations "at best discriminate against citizens who have no belief in a god and at worst can jail them for offences dubbed blasphemy".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Freedom of religion in the United States</span> Overview of religious freedom in the United States

In the United States, freedom of religion is a constitutionally protected right provided in the religion clauses of the First Amendment. Freedom of religion is closely associated with separation of church and state, a concept advocated by Colonial founders such as Dr. John Clarke, Roger Williams, William Penn, and later Founding Fathers such as James Madison and Thomas Jefferson.

Same-sex marriage in South Carolina has been legal since a federal court order took effect on November 20, 2014. Another court ruling on November 18 had ordered the state to recognize same-sex marriages from other jurisdictions. Following the 2014 ruling of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in Bostic v. Schaefer, which found Virginia's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional and set precedent on every state in the circuit, one judge accepted marriage license applications from same-sex couples until the South Carolina Supreme Court, in response to a request by the Attorney General, ordered him to stop. A federal district court ruled South Carolina's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional on November 12, with implementation of that decision stayed until noon on November 20. The first same-sex wedding ceremony was held on November 19.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Religious qualifications for public office in the United States</span>

Religious qualifications for public office in the United States have always been prohibited at the national level of the federal system of government under the Constitution. Article VI of the Constitution of the United States declares that "no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States". The First Amendment of the Constitution also prevents the Congress of the United States from making any law "respecting an establishment of religion".

Leo Pfeffer was an American lawyer, constitutional scholar, and humanist who was active in movement for religious freedom in the United States, and was one of leading legal proponents of the separation of church and state.

References

  1. 1 2 "Important SC Supreme Court Cases". South Carolina Bar. Retrieved 24 March 2012.
  2. 1 2 "24622 - Silverman v. Campbell, et al". South Carolina Judicial Department. Retrieved 24 March 2012.
  3. "Candidate without a prayer : An autobiography of a Jewish atheist in the Bible Belt". 2012.
  4. Associated Press (March 2, 1992). "Man's refusal to say "so help me god" hasn't helped get job as notary public". Herald-Journal. Charleston, SC. Retrieved 24 March 2012.
  5. Corbin, Caroline Mala (2011). "Nonbelievers and Government Speech". Iowa Law Review. 97. SSRN   1797804.
  6. Gellman, Susan; Susan Looper-Friedman (2007). "Thou shalt use the equal protection clause for religion cases (not just the establishment clause)" (PDF). University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law. Retrieved 24 March 2012.
  7. Associated Press (January 22, 1993). "Man attacks 'Supreme being' rule". Times-News. Retrieved 24 March 2012.
  8. AP (December 20, 1996). "Atheist mounts challenge to S.C. supreme court". The Robesonian. Retrieved 24 March 2012.
  9. Underwood, James L. (2006). The dawn of religious freedom in South Carolina . University of South Carolina Press. p.  53. ISBN   978-1570036217. silverman v. campbell south carolina supreme court.