Citation network
Bowen Vs. Kendrick
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 29, 1988
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
- Distinguished
- Relied / Followed
-
U.S. 589 (1988) U.S. Supreme Court Bowen v. KendrickSearch
-
U.S. 589 (1988) Bowen v. KendrickSearch
-
U. S. 600 -618. (a) With regard to the first factor of the applicable three-part test set forth in Lemon v. KurtzmanSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
of the Constitution. Flast v. CohenSearch
-
has flowed through and been administered by the Secretary of Health and Human Services. Valley Forge Christian College v. AmericansSearch
-
and Schlesinger v. ReservistsSearch
-
App. to Juris. Statement in No. 87-431, p. 48a. The court first found that, under Flast v. CohenSearch
-
to the merits, the District Court applied the three-part test for Establishment Clause cases set forth in Lemon v. KurtzmanSearch
-
Id. at 1563 (citing Grand Rapids School District v. BallSearch
-
App. to Juris. Statement in No. 431, p. 53a, is severable from the Act pursuant to Alaska Airlines, Inc. v. BrockSearch
-
For example, in Edwards v. AguillardSearch
-
without the benefit of a record as to how the statute had actually been applied. Page 487 U. S. 601 See Wolman v. WalterSearch
-
Public Education & Religious Liberty v. NyquistSearch
-
not only to the language of the statute but also to the manner in which it had been administered in practice. Levitt v. CommitteeSearch
-
U. S. 349 (1975). See also Grand Rapids School District v. BallSearch
-
grants might be challenged on the grounds that the award of a grant in a particular case would be impermissible. Hunt v. McNairSearch
-
a statutory grant to a religiously affiliated college would be invalid. Id. at 413 U. S. 736 . In Tilton v. RichardsonSearch
-
a grant of aid to the institution constitutionally impermissible. Id. at 403 U. S. 682 . See also Roemer v. MarylandSearch
-
on its face. As in previous cases involving facial challenges on Establishment Clause grounds, e.g., Edwards v. AguillardSearch
-
we assess the constitutionality of an enactment by reference to the three factors first articulated in Lemon v. KurtzmanSearch
-
U. S. 394 , a court may invalidate a statute only if it is motivated wholly by an impermissible purpose, Lynch v. DonnellySearch
-
U. S. 39 , 449 U. S. 41 (1980), if its primary effect is the advancement of religion, Estate of Thornton v. CaldorSearch
-
Walz v. TaxSearch
-
supra, at 465 U. S. 680 , nor can it be said that the AFLA lacks a legitimate secular purpose, see Edwards v. AguillardSearch
-
See Edwards v. AguillardSearch
-
As usual in Establishment Clause cases, see, e.g., Grand Rapids School District v. BallSearch
-
Estate of Thornton v. CaldorSearch
-
Grand Rapids School District v. BallSearch
-
is similar to other statutes that this Court has upheld against Establishment Clause challenges in the past. In Roemer v. MarylandSearch
-
Id. at 426 U. S. 746 (discussing Everson v. BoardSearch
-
approving busing services equally available to both public and private school children), and Board of Education v. AllenSearch
-
upholding state provision of secular textbooks for both public and private school students)). Similarly, in Tilton v. RichardsonSearch
-
Id. at 403 U. S. 676 . And in Hunt v. McNairSearch
-
made available regardless of whether it will ultimately flow to a secular or sectarian institution. See, e.g., Witters v. WashingtonSearch
-
Everson v. BoardSearch
-
by the First Amendment from participating in publicly sponsored social welfare programs. To the contrary, in Bradfield v. RobertsSearch
-
See Grand Rapids School District v. BallSearch
-
Lemon, 403 U.S. at 403 U. S. 613 (quoting Walz v. TaxSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial