Aguilar v. Felton

1985-07-01

Headline: Title I on-site teaching blocked: Court upheld that publicly funded teachers cannot give federally paid remedial classes inside parochial school classrooms, limiting how disadvantaged students in religious schools receive federal help.

Holding:

Real World Impact:

Bars federally funded public-school teachers from teaching remedial classes inside parochial school buildings.
Requires Title I services to be provided at neutral sites or by different delivery methods.
May reduce on-site remedial services available to disadvantaged students in religious schools.

Topics: church-state separation, public funding for religious schools, remedial education in parochial schools, First Amendment Establishment Clause

Summary

Background

A group of taxpayers sued the City of New York, challenging a long-running program that uses federal Title I funds to pay public school teachers and other professionals to give remedial classes to disadvantaged children inside parochial (mostly Catholic and some Hebrew) schools. The City supervises the teachers, supplies all materials, and requires removal of religious symbols from classrooms. The Second Circuit held the program unconstitutional, and the Supreme Court treated the case as a petition for review and agreed to decide the issue.

Reasoning

The central question was whether sending public employees into religious school buildings with federal money violates the First Amendment’s rule that government must not promote or become excessively entangled with religion. Relying on prior decisions, the Court concluded that the program requires ongoing, intrusive supervision and close administrative cooperation with sectarian schools, producing an unconstitutional entanglement even if the teachers teach only secular subjects. The Court therefore affirmed the lower court’s judgment that the on-site Title I instruction in parochial schools is unconstitutional.

Real world impact

The ruling means public school teachers paid with Title I money cannot provide remedial classes on the premises of parochial schools in the way New York City had done. Local and federal education officials must find neutral ways to help disadvantaged parochial-school students, such as off-site locations or different delivery methods. The decision leaves intact the goal of aiding needy children but limits one method of delivering that aid.

Dissents or concurrances

A concurring justice emphasized both entanglement and the subsidizing effect on religious schools; several dissenters warned the decision will reduce services to needy children and argued supervision and cooperation here did not create unconstitutional entanglement.