[ Return to APA Home Page ]

Guidelines for Submissions

APA NEWSLETTERS
    Philosophy and Computers
        Jon Dorbolo, Editor
    Feminism and Philosophy
        Joan Callahan, Editor
    Hispanic/Latino Issues in
    Philosophy
        Eduardo Mendieta, Editor
    International Cooperation
        Olufemi Taiwo, Editor
    Philosophy and Law
        Richard Nunan, Editor
    Philosophy and Lesbian,
    Gay, Bisexual and
    Transgender Issues
        Timothy Murphy, Editor
    Philosophy and Medicine
        Rosamond Rhodes, Editor
    Teaching Philosophy
        Tziporah Kasachkoff &
        Eugene Kelly, Co-Editors

Navigation
   
Newsletters Index (00:1)
    apaOnline Home Page

 

APA Newsletters

Fall 2000
Volume 00, Number 1


Newsletter on Philosophy and Law

Recent Law Review Articles of Interest

Previous Article | Index | Next Article


Heytens, Toby J. "School Choice and State Constitutions," 86 Virginia Law Review
117-162 (2000).

This article examines the history and constitutionality of Blaine Amendments as potential legal barriers to possible state legislative initiatives to extend school tuition voucher schemes to sectarian as well as nonsectarian private schools. Blaine Amendments are provisions which appeared in roughly 30 state constitutions towards the end of the 19th century, after James G. Blaine, an influential Reconstruction era Republican Congressional Representative, failed to secure a federal constitutional amendment which would have explicitly applied the First Amendment religion clauses to the states ("No State shall make any law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."), and incorporated an additional provision proscribing the use of state tax revenues to support sectarian education.

In recent years, the Supreme Court has tacitly, and sometimes explicitly, acknowledged the States’ right to draft more stringent restrictions on state support of religious institutions than are called for under the federal courts’ various interpretations of the First Amendment’s establishment clause. With respect to Blaine Amendments in particular, this policy was emphasized in the Supreme Court’s 1989 decision to deny cert. in Witters v. State Commission for the Blind, a case in which the Washington State Supreme Court ruled that the plaintiff’s desire to secure state funding for his seminary training under a state program providing financial assistance to disabled students (Witters was blind) violated Washington State’s version of the Blaine Amendment. The cert. denial came after the U.S. Supreme Court had already acknowledged, under an earlier appeal in the same case, that Witters’ claim did not violate the First Amendment’s establishment clause.

Despite this precedent, and others suggestive of the same conclusion, Heytens argues that the various state constitutional Blaine Amendments actually violate the federal Constitution, specifically the Fourteenth Amendment’s equal protection clause. For this argument, he draws heavily on the history of the federal attempt to enact the original Blaine Amendment, arguing that this effort, and the more successful subsequent state initiatives, were motivated chiefly by anti-Catholic bigotry. Finally, Heytens argues more generally that, in the absence of an establishment clause prohibition against an inclusive school voucher system, the establishment clause actually obliges States who go down this road to include sectarian institutions in such programs.


Previous Article | Index | Next Article


Copyright 2000, The American Philosophical Association.
Last revised: May 16, 2001