Talk:Lemon v. Kurtzman
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases, a collaborative effort to improve articles related to Supreme Court cases and the Supreme Court. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale. |
| Mid | This article is on a subject of Mid-importance within WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0. |
(Just cleared up some vandalism here.) -Grick(talk to me!) 02:56, May 7, 2005 (UTC)
After Dover judgement,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmiller_v._Dover_Area_School_District
has Lemon been re-affirmed? AV, December 22, 2005.
Your question misses the point. District courts are not in the position to "affirm" or "disaffirm" Supreme Court precedent. Kitzmiller is a trial judgment that was not appealed. The Supreme Court itself has not made any explicit decisions regarding Lemon, but in its most recent establishment clause cases, the Court has not used its own three-part test. Off-the-record comments by Chief Justice Roberts and other suggest distate for Lemon. As a result, its status is unclear. Given this lack of clarity, district courts deciding challenges under the establishment clause now have a choice of following Lemon, or any of other tests, or some eclectic concatenation thereof. Judge Jones chose to follow Lemon. For other district courts, it is still "choose, and choose at your own risk" as much now as before Kitzmiller. Non Curat Lex (talk) 22:52, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
