American History
Related: About this forumOn this day, June 14, 1943, West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette was decided.
If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein. If there are any circumstances which permit an exception, they do not now occur to us.
Argued March 11, 1943
Decided June 14, 1943
West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943), is a decision by the United States Supreme Court holding that the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment protects students from being forced to salute the American flag or say the Pledge of Allegiance in public school. The Court's 63 decision, delivered by Justice Robert H. Jackson, is remembered for its forceful defense of free speech and constitutional rights generally as being placed "beyond the reach of majorities and officials."
Barnette overruled a 1940 decision on the same issue, Minersville School District v. Gobitis, in which the Court stated that the proper recourse for dissent was to try to change the public school policy democratically. It was a significant court victory won by Jehovah's Witnesses, whose religion forbade them from saluting or pledging to symbols, including symbols of political institutions. However, the Court did not address the effect the compelled salutation and recital ruling had upon their particular religious beliefs but instead ruled that the state did not have the power to compel speech in that manner for anyone. In overruling Gobitis the Court primarily relied on the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment rather than the Free Exercise Clause.
{snip}
Decision of the Court
The Court held, in a 6-to-3 decision delivered by Justice Jackson, that it was unconstitutional for public schools to compel students to salute the flag. It thus overruled its decision in Minersville School District v. Gobitis (1940), finding that the flag salute was "a form of utterance" and "a primitive but effective means of communicating ideas." The Court wrote that any "compulsory unification of opinion" was doomed to failure and was antithetical to the values set forth in the First Amendment. The Court stated:
If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein.
The Supreme Court announced its decision on June 14, Flag Day.
{snip}
Robert Houghwout Jackson (February 13, 1892 October 9, 1954) was an American attorney and judge who served as an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court. He had previously served as United States Solicitor General, and United States Attorney General, and is the only person to have held all three of those offices. Jackson was also notable for his work as the Chief United States Prosecutor at the Nuremberg Trials of Nazi war criminals following World War II.
Jackson was admitted to the bar through a combination of reading law with an established attorney, and attending law school. He is the most recent justice without a law degree to be appointed to the Supreme Court. Jackson is well known for his advice that, "Any lawyer worth his salt will tell the suspect, in no uncertain terms, to make no statement to the police under any circumstances", and for his aphorism describing the Supreme Court, "We are not final because we are infallible, but we are infallible only because we are final." Jackson developed a reputation as one of the best writers on the Supreme Court, and one of the most committed to enforcing due process as protection from overreaching federal agencies.
{snip}
Mon Sep 8, 2014: Remembering the Brave Young Woman Who Refused to Say the Pledge of Allegiance Nearly 80 Years Ago
William (left) and Lillian (right) with father Walter Gobitas (via Jehovahs Witnesses)
September 8, 2014
by Hemant Mehta
Usually, when I mention Jehovahs Witnesses on this site, its not for a good reason. But we owe them a tremendous debt of gratitude.
In 1935, fifth-grader William Gobitas refused to say the Pledge of Allegiance because treating the flag like an idol went against his familys JW faith. His 12-year-old sister Lillian did the same thing the next day.
They were both expelled from the Minersville School District in Pennsylvania quickly after that. Their parents were forced to pay for a private school, and that was the beginning of a lawsuit that went all the way up to the Supreme Court.
In 1940, in Minersville School District v. Gobitis, the Court ruled 8-1 in favor of the school district. Seriously. They said it wasnt a violation of religious freedom to compel students to say the Pledge. It was such an awful decision, the Court (with a different makeup) reversed itself three years later in West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2014/09/08/remembering-the-brave-young-woman-who-refused-to-say-the-pledge-of-allegiance-nearly-80-years-ago/
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=310&invol=586
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=CASE&court=US&vol=319&page=624
Wed Jun 14, 2023: On this day, June 14, 1943, West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette was decided.
Tue Jun 14, 2022: On this day, June 14, 1943, West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette was decided.
Mon Jun 14, 2021: On this day, June 14, 1943, West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette was decided.
Sun Jun 14, 2020: On this day, June 14, 1943, West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette was decided.
Sat Jun 15, 2019: Happy 76th anniversary, West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette
Thu Jun 14, 2018: Happy 75th anniversary, West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette
Sun Feb 4, 2018: Gym teacher accused of assaulting student who wouldnt stand for Pledge of Allegiance
bucolic_frolic
(46,561 posts)Feud with Hugo Black
Justices Jackson and Hugo Black had profound professional and personal disagreements dating back to October 1941, the first term during which they served together on the Supreme Court. According to Dennis Hutchinson, editor of The Supreme Court Review, Jackson objected to Black's practice of importing his personal preferences into his jurisprudence.[45] Hutchinson quotes Jackson as having remarked, "With few exceptions, we all knew which side of a case Black would vote on when he read the names of the parties."[46] While Hutchinson points out that Jackson objected to Black's style of jurisprudence in such cases as Minersville v. Gobitis (1940) and United States v. Bethlehem Steel (1942), Black's involvement in the Jewell Ridge case struck Jackson as especially injudicious.
In Jewell Ridge Coal Corp. v. Mine Workers (1945), the Supreme Court faced the issue of whether to grant the coal company's petition for a rehearing, on the grounds that the victorious miners were, in a previous matter, represented by Crampton P. Harris, who was Justice Black's former law partner and personal lawyer. Despite this apparent conflict of interest, Black lobbied the Court for a per curiam denial of the petition. Justice Jackson objected, with the result that Jackson filed a concurrence disassociating himself from the ruling and, by implication, criticizing Black for not addressing the conflict of interest. Jackson also strongly objected to Black's judicial conduct in Jewell Ridge for another reason. As Jackson later alleged, while Justice Murphy was preparing his opinion, Black urged that the Court hand down its decision without waiting for the opinion and dissent. In Jackson's eyes, the "...only apparent reason behind this proposal was to announce the decision in time to influence the contract negotiations during the coal strike" between the coal company and the miners, which were taking place at the time.[47]
Jackson probably regarded Black's conduct as unbecoming of a Supreme Court Justice in another related matter. On April 3, 1945, the Southern Conference for Human Welfare held a dinner, at which it honored Justice Black as the 1945 recipient of the Thomas Jefferson Award. Fred M. Vinson spoke at the dinner. While Jackson declined an invitation to the event, citing a conflict arising out of the fact that a number of leading sponsors of the dinner were then litigants before the Supreme Court, Black attended the dinner and received his award. Crampton Harris, counsel in two pending cases, Jewell Ridge and CIO v. McAdory (1945), was one of the sponsors.[48]
Jackson later took these grievances public in two cables from Nuremberg. Jackson had informally been promised the Chief Justiceship by Roosevelt; however, the seat came open while Jackson was in Germany, and Roosevelt was dead. President Harry S. Truman was faced with two factions, one recommending Jackson for the seat, and the other advocating for Hugo Black. In an attempt to avoid controversy, Truman appointed Vinson. Jackson blamed machinations by Black for his being passed over for the seat, and publicly exposed some of Black's controversial behavior and feuding within the Court. The controversy was heavily covered in the press, casting the New Deal Court in a negative light, and had the effect of tarnishing Jackson's reputation in the years that followed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_H._Jackson
_____________
Maybe no law degree is an asset. Clerks write everything, don't they?