Sample School District Policies
19
See, e.g., Settle v. Dickson County Sch. Bd., 53 F.3d. 152 (6th Cir. 1995) (holding that teacher could give 9th grade students a grade of
“0”on her proposed research paper covering life of Jesus Christ because student already knew a lot about the subject, and therefore the
assignment’s objective of having students research an unfamiliar topic would not by accomplished, and also because while assignment
called for consulting at least four sources, student submitted the Bible as her sole source of information); Denooyer v. Livonia Pub. Sch.,
799 F. Supp. 744 (E.D. Mich. 1992), aff ’d 1 F.3d 1240 (1993)(upholding school district’s decision to prohibit second grader from
showing video of herself singing evangelical proselytizing Christian song in Classroom as part of “show and tell” program because
showing of the video tape was inconsistent with program’s purpose of teaching children oral communication skills).
20
Id.; see also Duran v. Nitsche, 780 F. Supp. 1048 (E.D. Pa. 1991), vacated, 972 F.2d 1331 (3rd Cir. 1992).
21
According to District and school dress codes, students are prohibited from wearing any gang-related attire, as well as hairstyles,
clothing, apparel, or cosmetics that substantially interferes with the work of the school, materially disrupts the educational process, or
impinges upon the rights of other students. See District Policy #5S-400 § 10 (School Discipline and Attendance Policy): Tinker v. Des
Moines Indep. Sch. Dist., 393 U.S. 503 (1969).
22
See Cheema v. Thompson, 67 F.3d 883 (9th Cir. 1995)
23
Utah Code Ann. §53A-11-12.
24
Upon holding a classroom moment of silence, teachers should instruct students that they may engage in any quiet activity of their
choice. However, teachers should not say or do anything (i.e., folding arms and bowing head, reading scriptures, etc.) that could
reasonably be interpreted as encouraging or discouraging prayer or other religious exercise.
25
Utah Code Ann §53A-13-101.1(3); Utah Admin. Code R277-105-7.
26
The United States Supreme Court has ruled that it is unconstitutional for clergymen to give prayers at public school graduation
ceremonies. Lee v. Weisman, 112 S. Ct. 2638 (1992). While the Supreme Court has not yet ruled on the constitutionality of student-led
graduation prayers, the lower federal courts are split on the issue. Compare American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey v. Black Horse
Pike Regional Bd. Of Educ., 84 F.3d 1471 (3rd Cir. 1996); Harris v. Joint Sch. Dist. No. 241, 41 F.3d 447 (9th Cir. 1994), vacated, 115
S. Ct. 2604 (1995) (ruling that student _led graduation prayers are unconstitutional); with Ingebretsen v. Jackson Pub. Sch. Dist., 88 F.3d
274 (5th Cir. 1996); Jones v. Clear Creek Indep. Sch. Dist., 977 F.2d 963 (5th Cir. 1992), cert. denied 113 S. Ct. 2950 (1993); and
Albright v. Board of Educ. Of Granite Sch. Dist., 765 F. Supp. 682 (D. Utah 1991) (upholding student-led graduation prayers).
27
See Wallace v. Jaffree, 105 S. Ct. 2479, 2498 (1985) (O’Connor, J., concurring): A state-sponsored moment of silence in the public
schools is different from state-sponsored vocal prayers or Bible reading. First, a moment of silence is not inherently religious. Silence,
unlike prayer or Bible reading need not be associated with a religious exercise. Second, a pupil who participates in a moment of silence
need not compromise his or her beliefs. During a moment of silence, a student who objects to prayer is left to his or her own
thoughts, and is not compelled to listen to the prayers or thoughts of others. . . . It is difficult to discern a serious threat to religious
liberty from a room of silent, thoughtful school children.
See also, Jaffree, 105 S. Ct. at 2495 (“Although we do not reach the other two prongs of the Lemon test, I note that the `effect’ of a
straightforward moment-of-silence statute is unlikely to `advanc[e]’ or inhibi[t] religion.’”) (Powell. J., concurring): School District
of Abington Township v. Schempp, 83 S. Ct. 1560, 1602 (“It has not been shown that . . . the observance of a moment of reverent
silence at the opening of class, may not adequately serve the solely secular purposes of the devotional activities without jeopardizing
either the religious liberties of any members of the community or the proper degree of separation between the spheres of religion
and government.”).
More recently, a federal court in Bown v. Gwinnett County Sch. Dist., 895 F. Supp. 1565, 1579 (N.D. Ga. 1995) noted:
Momentary silence simply does not jeopardize either the religious liberties of any members of the community or the
proper degree of separation between the spheres of religion and government. Momentary silence does not advance or
inhibit religion. Providing this moment of silence for school children does not convey a government message advancing or
inhibiting religion.
28
See Lundberg v. West Monona Communication Sch. Dist., 731 F. Supp. 331, 341 (N.D. Iowa 1989) (holding that school districts’
interest in avoiding establishment of religion outweighs students’ right to free speech and free exercise and thus prayer at graduation
should not be allowed).
29
Principals, teachers, school board members, and other school officials present on the stand as an official part of graduation
ceremonies should not say or do anything (i.e., folding arms and bowing heads, reading scriptures, etc.) that could reasonably be
interpreted as encouraging or discouraging prayer or other religious exercise during the moment of silence.
30
See Ingebretsen v. Jackson Pub. Sch. Dist., 88 F.3d 274 (5th Cir. 1996) (ruling unconstitutional a Mississippi state statute that
permitted “invocations, benedictions, or nonsectarian, nonproselytizing student-initiated voluntary prayer during compulsory or
noncompulsory school-related student assemblies, student sporting events, . . . and other school-related student events.”): Doe v.
Duncanville Indep. Sch. Dist., 994 F. 2d 160 (5th Cir. 1993) (striking down coach’s custom of leading girls’ basketball team in Lord’s
Prayer before and after practice and games).
Sample School
District Policies
15
193