1
ARTIFACT #6 KAREN WHITE V. BOARD OF EDUCATION
Karen White v. Board of Education
Artifact #6
Rashi Ratliff
Dr. Isbell
EDU 210
November 25, 2014
Karen White, a kindergartener teacher, informed her parents and students that, due to her being a Jehovah’s Witness, she could no longer lead activities or participate in projects that were religious in nature. This included holiday decorations, singing “Happy Birthday” or reciting the Pledge of Allegiance. The parents protested and the principal recommended her dismissal based on her ineffectively meeting the needs of her students.
Karen White, under the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment, has the right to worship as she chooses. In the case Wisconsin v. Yoder the Court concluded that enforcing a state compulsory attendance law against Amish children after they had completed the eighth grade, infringed on their free exercise of religion rights (Wisconsin v Yoder, 1972). Karen White is a Jehovah Witness and her religion does not permit her to lead or participate in any activity that may be against her religious beliefs. Therefore the school would be infringing on her free exercise of religion rights if they forced her to do otherwise.
In the case of West Virginia State Board of Education v Barnette, the Board adopted a resolution requiring students and teachers to salute the flag and recite the Pledge of Allegiance in school. A student’s failure to do so was seen as “insubordination” and resulted in suspension. The Court ruled the West Virginia State School Board’s actions as unconstitutional because as a Jehovah Witness, the student is forbidden from honoring the flag (West Virginia State Board of Education v Barnette, 1943). The same goes in the defense of Karen White. The principal recommending her dismissal for not participating in certain activities, one being the reciting of the Pledge of Allegiance would be unconstitutional because it violates her free exercise of religion rights.
The principal recommended Karen White’s dismissal based on her ineffectively meeting the needs of her students. Although she may not celebrate or participate in certain activities because of religious reasons does not mean she should totally disallow it in her classroom. The case Clever v. Cherry Hill Tp. Board of Education the Court upheld that it is permissible for public schools to display religious holiday symbols in school calendars as long as it is absent of denominational preference (Clever v Cherry Hill Tp. Bd. Of Educ., 1993). Just as in the case of Karen White, the principal wants to effectively meet the needs of the students concerning certain activities. The teacher should not take away the students’ rights to acknowledge activities that may be religious in nature. As long as there are educational purposes and do not appear to endorse the religious nature of the holiday, Karen White should allow certain activities so that she can effectively meet the needs of the students.
Similarly, in Florey v. Sioux Falls School District, the Court upheld that the study and performance of religious songs, including Christmas carols, are constitutional if there purpose is the “advancement of students’ knowledge of society’s cultural and religious heritage (Florey v. Sioux Falls School District, 1980). In the principal’s defense, as long as the activities show a purpose of the “advancement of the students’ knowledge of cultural and religious heritage, than Karen White should be able to involve herself in such activities so that the students’ needs are met in an educational manner. This will allow her to not completely forgo activities and projects because they are religious in nature.
In conclusion, the principal recommended Karen White’s dismissal based on her ineffectively meeting the needs of students. I believe that there was not a justifiable basis for Karen’s dismissal. Due to the free exercise of religion right, the Court will rule in her favor. “The Free Exercise Clause guarantees individuals the right to worship as they choose” (Underwood, Webb, 211). Karen White’s religion prohibits her to participate in certain projects or activities, although approved by the school, that are religious in nature. Just as in the 1972 case of Wisconsin v Yoder the Court ruled that enforcing a state compulsory attendance law on Amish children infringed on their free exercise of religion rights. The Court will also find that the school infringed on Karen White’s free exercise of religion rights by recommending her dismissal for disallowing activities that she believe are religious in nature.
Similarly, in the 1943 caseWest Virginia State Board of Education v Barnette the court upheld its ruling that the Board’s action was unconstitutional because they suspended a student for refusing to recite the Pledge of Allegiance due to his religious belief as a Jehovah Witness. The same rule will apply in Karen’s case. She is also a Jehovah’s Witness and also has the right to not recite the Pledge of Allegiance or perform in any other activities that she believes goes against her religion. Although Karen White has the right to not lead certain activities or participate in certain projects because they may be religious in nature, one must keep in mind that “schools must protect individuals’ rights to free speech and free exercise of religion, not subject religious actions or speech to a different standard. Schools must be places that treat religion and religious beliefs with fairness and respect” (Underwood, Webb, 222). Although there was no justifiable basis for Karen’s dismissal, I do believe that there should be an appropriate balance in the classroom concerning certain activities so that both the teacher and the students’ needs are met.
References
Clever v Cherry Hill Tp. Bd. of Educ., 838 F. Supp. 929 (D. N.J. 1993).
Florey v Sioux Falls School District 49-5, 619 F.2d 1311 (8th Cir. 1980).
West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943).
Wisconsin v Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972).
Underwood, J., & Webb, L. (2006). Teacher's Rights. In School Law for Teachers (p. 211, 222). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education.