The Historic Engle v. VItale Decision 50 years later

Justice Hugo Black wrote the decision of the Court announced 50 years ago this week.  "Neither the fact that the prayer may be denominationally neutral nor the fact that its observances on the part of students is voluntary can serve to free it from the limitations of the Establishment Clause. ... It is neither sacrilegious nor anti-religious to say that each separate government in this country should stay out of the business of writing or sanctioning official prayers and leave that purely religious function to the people themselves and to those the people choose to look to for religious guidance."

Over the last 50 years many have seemed to either ignore or to attempt to include a new meaning in the Establishment Clause.  The most recent attempt was by the failed Republican Senate candidate in Delaware.  ""Where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state?" she said in a debate with Chris Coons, her Democratic opponent. When Coons told her the First Amendment prohibited government from establishing any religion, according to the Associated Press and WDEL radio, O'Donnell replied, "You're telling me that's in the First Amendment?"  Gee it was only 48 years since the Engle v. Vitale decision and as an attorney one would have thought that it would be obvious.  Black in writing the 6-1 opinion took great measures to go back to 16th century England to track the historical basis for his decision.

The one key element here is that it does not prohibit individuals from saying a prayer in school if they want to engage in such behavior.  However, what the case prohibited was school officials in an official capacity from leading school prayers.  I remember my high school days in the Midwest in the early 1980s.  This issue was still being discussed.  What most people seem to forget is that the first Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; . . "  While the original application of the Bill of Rights was meant to be a list of prohibitions that the federal government could not impose on the states.  This explains why some states in their early days had "established" religions, like Virginia.  But the states eventually got rid of their state religions long before the 14th Amendment and the Supreme Court used its provisions to incorporate the Bill of Rights to apply to individuals against state interference.

As a result, today we celebrate the freedom of religion without our school teachers attempting to prostlytize their beliefs.  Children can still pray there is no prohibition and that is the way is should be.  Everyone has the right to practice their religion as long as it does not interfere with another person's rights to be bothered by their exhortations.  Let's hope it stays that way.