Under the doctrine of Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 US 390, we think it entirely plain that the Act of 1922 unreasonably interferes with the liberty of parents and guardians to direct the upbringing and education of children under their control. Law and Labor - Page 1481925Full view - About this book
| Stephen L. Carter - Law - 1999 - 196 pages
...intended to do so. The Court rested its decision on a principle that is, nowadays, all too often ignored: "the liberty of parents and guardians to direct the...upbringing and education of children under their control." Religious schools are a crucial tool in the ability of the religious communities to preserve their... | |
| Stephen D. Sugarman, Frank R. Kemerer - Education - 2011 - 396 pages
...religious upbringing. As the Court in Pierce put it: "We think it entirely plain that the Act of 1 922 unreasonably interferes with the liberty of parents and guardians to direct the apbringing and education of children under their control."92 Moreover, Chief Justice Burger ultimately... | |
| John E. Semonche - History - 2000 - 532 pages
...McReynolds was sympathetic to the threat to property that the law posed, again he anchored the decision on "the liberty of parents and guardians to direct the...upbringing and education of children under their control." Illustrating the Fourteenth Amendment's nationalizing potential, the justice concluded: "The fundamental... | |
| Kermit L. Hall - Law - 2000 - 506 pages
...clause. The Meyer right "to marry, to establish a home and bring up children" was further amplified as the "liberty of parents and guardians to direct the...upbringing and education of children under their control." Pierce, 268 US at 534-35. 48. See, eg. West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish, 300 US 379 (1937). 49. 304... | |
| June Carbone - Family & Relationships - 2000 - 372 pages
...In an opinion that Woodhouse describes as a "sequel and anticlimax" to Meyer, McReynolds reiterated "the liberty of parents and guardians to direct the...upbringing and education of children under their control." "The child is not the mere creature of the State;" the majority opinion held, "those who nurture him... | |
| Cynthia L. Cates, Wayne V. McIntosh - Political Science - 2001 - 264 pages
...legal reach. Although the Supreme Court has said that states may not "unreasonably interfere . . . with the liberty of parents and guardians to direct...upbringing and education of children under their control" (Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 US 510, at 534-35 (1925)), it has also recognized the states' strong... | |
| Douglas S. Reed - Education - 2003 - 262 pages
...to attend only public schools. Justice James McReynolds argued that the law unreasonably interfered "with the liberty of parents and guardians to direct...upbringing and education of children under their control."' Thus the federal understanding of the right to education was defined in the early twentieth century... | |
| John Denvir - Law - 2001 - 174 pages
...There the Supreme Court held that an Oregon statute, which effectively closed private schools, violated the "liberty of parents and guardians to direct the upbringing and education of the children under their controL" 4 In a 1937 case the Supreme Court rejected the doctrine of substantive... | |
| Margot Arce de Vázquez, Matilde Albert Robatto - History - 1998 - 796 pages
...Supremo declaró entonces que: [...l the child is not the mere creature of the state. The Oregon law unreasonably interferes with the liberty of parents and guardians to direct the umpringing and education of children under their control. (Citado por Blum, Pierce vs. Society of Sisters,... | |
| |