Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District v. Grumet
1994 United States Supreme Court case / From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Dear Wikiwand AI, let's keep it short by simply answering these key questions:
Can you list the top facts and stats about Board of Ed. of Kiryas Joel Village School Dist. v. Grumet?
Summarize this article for a 10 year old
SHOW ALL QUESTIONS
Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District v. Grumet, 512 U.S. 687 (1994), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court ruled on the constitutionality of a school district created with boundaries that matched that of a religious community – in this case, the Satmar community of Kiryas Joel, New York. The case was argued by Nathan Lewin on behalf of Kiryas Joel, Julie Mereson on behalf of the State of New York, and Jay Worona on behalf of the respondents.[1]
Quick Facts Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District v. Grumet, Argued March 30, 1994 Decided June 27, 1994 ...
Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District v. Grumet | |
---|---|
Argued March 30, 1994 Decided June 27, 1994 | |
Full case name | Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District, Petitioner v. Louis Grumet, et al. |
Citations | 512 U.S. 687 (more) 114 S. Ct. 2481; 129 L. Ed. 2d 546; 1994 U.S. LEXIS 4830; 62 U.S.L.W. 4665; 94 Cal. Daily Op. Service 4818; 94 Daily Journal DAR 8917; 8 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 359 |
Case history | |
Prior | Grumet v. New York Educ. Dept., 151 Misc. 2d 60, 579 N.Y.S.2d 1004 (Sup. Ct. 1992); affirmed sub. nom., Grumet v. Bd. of Educ. of the Kiryas Joel Vil. School Dist., 187 A.D.2d 16, 592 N.Y.S.2d 123 (App. Div., 3d Dept. 1992); affirmed, 81 N.Y.2d 518, 601 N.Y.S.2d 61, 618 N.E.2d 94 (1993); cert. granted, 510 U.S. 989 (1993). |
Holding | |
A New York statute that carved out a school district that followed village lines, which village was almost entirely composed of members of one religious group, was held to violate the Establishment Clause of the United States Constitution. | |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinions | |
Majority | Souter (parts I, II-B, II-C, III), joined by Blackmun, Stevens, O'Connor, Ginsburg |
Plurality | Souter (parts II (introduction), II-A), joined by Blackmun, Stevens, Ginsburg |
Concurrence | Blackmun |
Concurrence | Stevens, joined by Blackmun, Ginsburg |
Concurrence | O'Connor |
Concurrence | Kennedy |
Dissent | Scalia, joined by Rehnquist, Thomas |
Laws applied | |
U.S. Const., amend. I |
Close