| Epperson v. Arkansas | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued October 16, 1968 Decided November 12, 1968 | |
| Full case name | Susan Epperson, et al. v. Arkansas |
| Citations | 393U.S.97 (more) 89 S. Ct. 266; 21L. Ed. 2d 228; 1968U.S. LEXIS 328 |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Appeal from the Supreme Court of Arkansas |
| Subsequent | None |
| Holding | |
| States may not require curricula to align with the views of any particular religion. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Fortas, joined by Warren, Douglas, Brennan, White, Marshall |
| Concurrence | Black |
| Concurrence | Harlan |
| Concurrence | Stewart |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. amend. I,amend. XIV | |
Epperson v. Arkansas, 393 U.S. 97 (1968), was a unanimouslandmarkUnited States Supreme Court case that invalidated anArkansas statute prohibiting the teaching ofhuman evolution in the public schools.[1] The Court held that theFirst 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 theEstablishment Clause of the First Amendment. After this decision, some jurisdictions passed laws that required the teaching ofcreation science alongside evolution when evolution was taught. The Court also ruled these laws were unconstitutional in the 1987 case,Edwards v. Aguillard.[2]
Epperson focused on the constitutionality of a 1928 Arkansas statute prohibiting the teaching of human evolutionary theory in its public schools and universities. The statute was enacted during a period ofChristian Fundamentalist religious fervor in the 1920s. The Arkansas statute was modeled after Tennessee's 1925 "Butler Act", the subject of the well knownScopes Trial in 1925. TheTennessee Supreme Court upheld theconstitutionality of the Tennessee law in 1927, allowing the state to continue to prohibit the teaching of evolution.
The Arkansas law was passed through theinitiative process, the first anti-evolution law in the United States passed through general election, and teachers who violated it were made subject to fine and dismissal by the state. The law made it unlawful for any teacher or other instructor in any university, college, public school or other institution of the state which is supported in whole or in part from public funds derived by state or local taxation to teach the theory or doctrine that mankind ascended or descended from alower order of animals, and also that it be unlawful for any teacher, textbook commission, or other authority exercising the power to select textbooks for above-mentioned institutions to adopt or use in any such institution a textbook that teaches the doctrine or theory that mankind ascended or descended from a lower order of animal.[3]
Thirty years later,Cold War concerns over Soviet success with the 1957Sputnik launch led to the 1958National Defense Education Act andBiological Sciences Curriculum Study settingtextbook standards which included evolution.Epperson v. Arkansas involved the teaching of biology in aLittle Rock high school. Based upon the recommendation of the school biology teachers, administrators adopted the 1965 textbookModern Biology for the 1965–1966 school year, which contained a chapter discussingCharles Darwin and evolutionary theory, and prescribed the subject be taught to the students.[4]
Susan Epperson was a teacher in the Little Rock school system, employed to teach 10th gradebiology at theLittle Rock Central High School. The adoption of the new textbook and curriculum standard put her in a legal dilemma because it remained a criminal offense to teach the material in her state, and to do as her school district instructed would also put her at risk of dismissal. Epperson was not opposed to the teaching, and with backing from the Arkansas chapter of theNational Education Association and theAmerican Civil Liberties Union, and the unequivocal support of theLittle Rock Ministerial Association, filed suit to test the federal constitutionality of the Arkansas state law. She filed in theChancery Court inPulaski County seeking nullification of the law and an injunction against her being dismissed for teaching the evolutionary curriculum. She was joined in the suit by H. H. Blanchard, a parent with children in the school.[5][6]
The trial began on April 1, 1966, and the court issued its decision on May 27, 1966.[7] The Chancery Court held that the statute violated theFourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution which protects citizens from state interference with freedom of speech and thought as contained in theFirst Amendment. The lower court decided the law was unconstitutional because it "tends to hinder the quest for knowledge, restrict the freedom to learn, and restrain the freedom to teach."[8]
The state appealed the decision to theArkansas Supreme Court, which reversed the lower court ruling on June 5, 1967.[7] The opinion read:
Upon the principal issue, that of constitutionality, the court holds that Initiated Measure No. 1 of 1928, Ark.Stat.Ann. § 81627 and § 81628 (Repl.1960), is a valid exercise of the state's power to specify the curriculum in its public schools. The court expresses no opinion on the question whether the Act prohibits any explanation of the theory of evolution or merely prohibits teaching that the theory is true, the answer not being necessary to a decision in the case and the issue not having been raised.
This decision left the ban against teaching evolution in effect.[6]
Epperson appealed the State Supreme Court's reversal to the United States Supreme Court. Eugene R. Warren presented arguments for the appellant, Epperson, and Don Langston, anAssistant Attorney General for Arkansas, argued for the state of Arkansas. Both Langston and the State Appeal Court focused on the power given to states to set curriculum standards, and did not delve far into the subject of evolutionary theory itself nor to the boundaries between church and state.[9]The U.S. Supreme Court hearing commenced on October 16, 1968, and the Court announced its unanimous decision on November 12, 1968.[7] It found the reasons given in the Arkansas reversal were in error. The Court went on to say that the clear purpose of the Arkansas statute against the teaching of evolution was to protect a particular religious view, and was thus unconstitutional. In a decision written by JusticeAbe Fortas, the Court held that:
The overriding fact is that Arkansas’ law selects from the body of knowledge a particular segment which it proscribes for the sole reason that it is deemed to conflict with a particular religious doctrine; that is, with a particular interpretation of the Book of Genesis by a particular religious group.[10]
The Court found that not only was the state prohibited from advancing or protecting a particular religious view, but that
[T]he state has no legitimate interest in protecting any or all religions from views distasteful to them.[10]
JusticeHugo Black issued a separate opinion to overturn the Arkansas law, finding the law unconstitutionally "vague" rather than an unconstitutional religious infringement. While agreeing with the majority to reverse the State Appeal Court decision, his opinion details his dissent from the majority over the First Amendment issue.[6]
ThoughWilliam Jennings Bryan famously testified to some questions aboutBiblical creation in the 1925Scopes v. State trial, that Court, like this one, was asked only to judge whether teachings about human evolution could be prohibited in the public schools. Bryan, who opposed the evolution instruction, never argued that the teaching of Biblical creation belonged in the school.
The precedent set inEpperson, in which the Court concluded the sole motive behind the ban against evolution teaching in Arkansas was to protect a particular religious view, effectively nullified all other related evolution education prohibitions throughout the United States. Within a short time of theEpperson decision, religious opponents of the teaching attempted through other means to lessen its influence in the curriculum, including requiring schools to teach biblical creation alongside evolution or forcing schools to provide disclaimers that evolution was "only a theory". These attempts eventually resulted in precedent-setting court decisions includingMcLean v. Arkansas, and ultimatelyEdwards v. Aguillard, which struck down a Louisiana statute as unconstitutional.[2]
This article incorporatespublic domain material from this U.S government document.