White v.

School District

White v. School District

Yasmin Reyes
NV Law 210
White v. School District

When someone finds religion, they essentially find who they are. Although it is not for

everyone, those who become religious are quite serious about it. They chose to live their lives

through that particular religion. Everyone, including those who work in public education, have

the right to practice what they please. Ms. Karen White, a kindergarten teacher, recently became

a Jehovah’s Witness. Now, Jehovah’s Witnesses do not celebrate holidays in any capacity.

Because of this Ms. White feels that she cannot participate in certain activities that include

holidays. From birthdays to Christmas, her religion does not allow it. This even extends to the

Pledge of Allegiance. Many parents have become infuriated with this because they feel as though

Ms. White is now neglecting to meet all the needs of her students. The Principle of the school,

Mr. Bill Ward, felt the same way and recommended Ms. White for her dismissal on those

grounds.

This country was founded on the belief that everyone is entitled to their own religious

practices. Mr. Ward is not attempting to discriminate against Ms. White for her religious beliefs

or wanting to practice those beliefs. The reason for Ms. White’s dismissal is simply that she is no

longer fulfilling her duties to her students. The school empathizes with Ms. White’s choice of

religion and the practices that come with it. But in allowing her do so at school greatly deprives

from not only the fun that their peers get to participate in, but also the historical lessons that are

behind each holiday. It is understood that the parties are not required for her to lead, but the

lessons are now being unfairly omitted. Ms. White also feels that she should not have to stand for

the pledge of allegiance every day. The pledge is recited every morning simply to salute our

country. It is has been a sort of tradition in school for many years now. If Ms. White’s very

impressionable students see her not doing this in their first year of school, they won’t realize the

significance it has to our country. Although, Ms. White’s right to religion is protected under Free
White v. School District

Exercise Clause; in Wisconsin v. Yoder, an exception was found. The court decided that free

exercise could not reasonably be absolute. See, Ms. White is free to worship whomever she

wants to, but she is not permitted to practice her religion during instructional time. Mr. Ward and

the school are just in their actions on these grounds.

Every child’s favorite days in school are the day when they get to celebrate something.

Whether it be from dressing up and getting treats at the Halloween party. Or bringing in

cupcakes on their birthday and having the class sing happy birthday. Those are the days they

treasure most throughout the school year. In, Agostini v. Felton, the court added another part to

the Endorsement Test. They decided that if the exercise ends up causing too much interrelation

between religion and state, it could be prohibited. Ms. White is outright refusing to participate in

any sort of celebratory activity with her students (in educational and celebratory capacities). By

doing this she is allowing her actions to directly encroach on her ability to fulfill her duties as a

kindergarten teacher. Why should only her students not participate in activities that the rest of the

children get to enjoy in?

Ms. White has newly converted to become a Jehovah’s Witness. It comes as no

surprise that she would want to follow their principles of living to a T. This lifestyle change must

be supported by the school. This is because Ms. White is not promoting or imposing her religion

onto her students. She is simply living her life through the eyes of her lord. And the school

cannot punish her for that. In fact, it is a direct violation of her rights as a U.S citizen. Under the

Establishment Clause, Ms. White (and therefore her institution) are not in violation of any of the

three parts of the Lemon Test. Established as a direct result of Lemon v. Kurtzman and revised in

1985. The purpose of her actions (or lack thereof) was not to endorse her religion. She did not

preach to her students about why holidays shouldn’t be celebrated. The effect of her not
White v. School District

participating also did not lead to her conveying that she wanted her students to follow her lead.

Lastly, in no way, shape, or form did Ms. White not wanting to host holiday parties coerce her

students into also not wanting to participate in those parties.

There are over two hundred different religions that are actively practiced by people in the

United States. This is a nation that has always acted as a safe haven for those who wanted to

practice any religion they wanted. It is incredibly important to teach our children that everyone is

going to be different. Our children need to be tolerant of those different from them. This lesson

must be engrained from a young age. In Clever v. Cherry Hills, the court ruled that religion and

its symbols are acceptable subjects to learn of. By Ms. White’s students experiencing what it is

like to be a Jehovah’s Witness (for only nine months), they gain new perspective and knowledge

about the diversity of our country. They will be able to accept other religions, skin colors, or any

other orientation more easily and naturally. Benevolence is a lesson that the children will carry

with them for a lifetime.

Conclusively, I believe that there are certain duties that a teacher possess. Especially as a

teacher who educates young children, she has to open as much of the world to them as she can.

This does in fact include holidays. There are many interesting events that happened that resulted

in those holidays that the children should get to learn about. The educational activities (not

parties) that come after the lesson should also be taught. For this case, however, there can be a

compromise between both parties. Ms. White should be allowed to not participate in holiday

functions and still be allowed to work at the school, so long as she leads in teaching the historical

standpoint. When it comes time for the children to attend the festivities, they can be escorted to

another teacher’s room. Then Ms. White wouldn’t have to violate her religion and the children

are not deprived. I believe this would be a fair and the best solution.
White v. School District

References

1. Wisconsin v. Yoder, (1972)

2. Agostini v. Felton, (1997)
3. Lemon v. Kurtzman, (1971)
4. Clever v. Cherry Hills Township Board of Education, (1993)
5. School Law for Teachers: By Underwood & Webb
6. http://alphagroup.pbworks.com/w/page/12319520/Law%20Briefs
7. http://undergod.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=000068