Supreme Court Cases Period 1 Fall 2015

By: Cody Snyder
Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972)
Background Information:
Jonas Yoder and Wallace Miller, both members of the Old Order Amish religion, and Adin Yutzy, a member of the Conservative
Amish Mennonite Church, were prosecuted under a Wisconsin law that required all children to attend public schools until age
16. The three parents refused to send their children to such schools after the eighth grade, arguing that high school attendance
was contrary to their religious beliefs.
Constitutional Issue(s) :
Did Wisconsin's requirement that all parents send their children to school at least until age 16 violate the First Amendment by
criminalizing the conduct of parents who refused to send their children to school for religious reasons?
Supreme Court Decision (Majority Opinion) :
In a unanimous decision, the court ruled in favor if the free exercise of religion under the First Amendment. The Court found
the values and programs of secondary school where in direct conflict with that of the Amish religion perspectives.
Precedent:
The precedent that was set was free exercise of religion under the 1 st
Amendment outweighs states laws when claimed for a religious purpose.
Concurring Opinion(s) :
Justice Stewart - He believed that we cannot impose the criminal punishment
upon the guardians for religiously based refusal to compel their children to
attend public high school.
Justice White - He claims that their claims would drastically be changed if the
religious refusal called for no schooling at all.
Dissenting Opinion:
Justice Douglas - The Court assumes the only interests that matter are those of the parents. The court agrees to the claim, the
parents are seeking vindicate to their free exercise claims, but also that of their children.
Sources Cited (MLA)
"Wisconsin v. Yoder." Oyez. Chicago-Kent College of Law at Illinois Tech, n.d. Dec 8, 2015.
"Wisconsin v. Yoder." LII / Legal Information Institute. N.p., n.d. Web. 08 Dec. 2015.
Quick Links
https://www.oyez.org/cases/1971/70-110
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/406/205#writing-USSC_CR_0406_0205_ZD
14 | Page