West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943)

Facts:
The West Virginia Board of Education adopted a measure requiring that all public school students salute the flag and recite the Pledge of Allegiance. Students who did not participate could be expelled; their parents could even lose custody of them. A group of Jehovah's Witnesses challenged the law on First Amendment grounds. They argued that the forced flag salute conflicted with their religious beliefs against idol worship and graven images, and therefore violated their free exercise of religion and freedom of speech rights under the First Amendment.

Issue:
Whether a compulsory flag-salute law for school children violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments.

Holding:
By a 6-3 vote, the Court held that school officials do violate the First Amendment by compelling students to salute the flag and recite the Pledge of Allegiance.

Reasoning:
The First Amendment prohibits government officials from compelling individuals to speak or espouse orthodox beliefs that are at odds with their conscience and values. “There is no doubt that, in connection with the pledges, the flag salute is a form of utterance.” The purpose of the First Amendment is to ensure that individuals have an individual sphere of freedom of thought and belief that the government cannot invade. “Authority here is to be controlled by public opinion, not public opinion by authority.”

Majority:
“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.” (Justice Robert Jackson)

Dissent:
"An act compelling profession of allegiance to a religion, no matter how subtly or tenuously promoted, is bad. But an act promoting good citizenship and national allegiance is within the domain of governmental authority and is therefore to be judged by the same considerations of power and of constitutionality as those involved in the many claims of immunity from civil obedience because of religious scruples." (Justice Felix Frankfurter)

Read more about this case at firstamendmentcenter.org:

Last updated: Monday, September 6, 2010 | 12:29:30