Blog from the Capital

The American Constitution Society has published an issue brief by Edward Correia entitled, “A Constitutional Framework for Addressing Religious Viewpoints in Public School Classrooms.” In the 17-page paper, Correia - a D.C. attorney and adjunct law professor at American University - makes a few interesting classroom distinctions while laying out the Court's legal equations for Establishment Clause cases, like the difference between government speech that "endorses" religious beliefs, as opposed to "explaining" them or simply "acknowledging" them. More notably, he argues for an important difference between what happens in a science classroom as opposed to a history or literature class.

After 15+ pages of mostly technical legal talk, we get the important stuff at the end, where Correia says we shouldn't be afraid of *acknowledging* religious beliefs, even in science class.

In my view, it is consistent with the Establishment Clause for teachers to offer an appropriate acknowledgment of religious beliefs in the presentation of such sensitive subjects as evolution or the origins of life. Teachers should make clear that the scientific explanation of the development of plants and animals is an important and established part of the curriculum. It does not undermine the importance of these topics if teachers also say: “We recognize that some students hold religious beliefs that may be inconsistent with the theory of evolution,” and “We encourage all students to respect the views of others, including those who reject the theory of evolution on religious grounds.” There are many other ways of expressing these same ideas. The need for such statements as well as their context and timing will vary greatly depending upon the circumstances. If done in a manner that merely acknowledges rather than endorses beliefs, I believe that they do not conflict with the Establishment Clause because they simply show tolerance and respect for alternative viewpoints.

A state may go even further and explain religious viewpoints in courses and contexts other than science class if it avoids endorsing or disparaging a particular viewpoint. That is what happens in comparative religion courses or courses on the history of religion where several religions are discussed. . . .Again, schools can acquaint students with these important ideas without running afoul of the Establishment Clause because it is understood that the state, through the teacher’s presentation, is explaining these concepts but not endorsing them.