Wisconsin v. Yoder

In Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972), Amish parents refused to send their children to school after the eighth grade. Id. The Amish father sought to exempt his children from a Wisconsin compulsory-school-attendance law, arguing that school attendance after eighth grade interfered with central tenets of his family's faith. 406 U.S. at 207-13, 92 S. Ct. at 1529-32. The state asserted that the compulsory school attendance laws, which required children to attend school until they turned sixteen, were constitutional because the state had an overriding interest in a compulsory education system, which "prepared citizens to participate effectively" in the political system and to be self-sufficient members of society. Id. at 221. Although acknowledging the state's strong and traditional interest in providing education, the Court found that interest "not totally free from a balancing process when it impinges on fundamental rights and interests, such as those specifically protected by the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment, and the traditional interest of parents with respect to the religious upbringing of their children." Id. at 213-14, 92 S. Ct. at 1532. The Court in Yoder did not articulate a precise formula for weighing a valid state interest against those parental rights. But it emphasized that "only those interests of the highest order and those not otherwise served can overbalance legitimate claims to the free exercise of religion." Id. at 215, 92 S. Ct. at 1533. Thus, the Court suggested that a state must demonstrate a compelling interest to justify overriding the combination of religious and parental rights involved. Id. at 221, 92 S. Ct. at 1536 (addressing whether state's interest in compulsory education "is so compelling that even the established religious practices of the Amish must give way"). In Yoder, the Supreme Court found the state's parens patriae interest in compulsory secondary education insufficient to overcome the interest of an Amish parent who had shown that such regulation would "gravely endanger, if not destroy, the free exercise of Amish religious beliefs." Yoder, 406 U.S. at 219, 229, 92 S. Ct. at 1535, 1540. The father in Yoder had demonstrated "the adequacy of their alternative mode" of vocational instruction to accomplish the overall interests advanced by the state, id. at 235, 92 S. Ct. at 1543, and had "introduced persuasive evidence . . . that accommodating their religious objections . . . would not impair the physical or mental health of their children," id. at 234, 92 S. Ct. at 1542. In Yoder, the Court was concerned only with the "interest of parents, as contrasted with that of the state." Id. at 232, 92 S. Ct. at 1541. Specifically, the Court considered the power of the state to impose criminal penalties on Amish parents for refusing on religious grounds to send their children to school. Id. The Court reversed the conviction of an Amish farmer who had been convicted of violating Wisconsin's compulsory school attendance law. The Court found that the state had an interest regarding basic education, but held that the state interest is not totally free from a balancing process when it impinges on fundamental rights and interests, such as those protected by the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment. Id. at 214, 92 S. Ct. at 1532 . The Court examined the Amish's interest in maintaining its community structure and the state's interest in preparing citizens for effective and intelligent participation in the political system and in preparing self-reliant and self-sufficient participants in society. The Court then concluded that the state interests would not be sufficiently advanced by requiring the Amish school children, who were enrolled until the completion of a basic education, to attend school for an additional two years. Id. at 222, 92 S. Ct. at 1536. Although the state proffered no evidence to support the assertion, the Supreme Court accepted the general proposition. Id. The Court, however, held that denying the Amish a religious exemption would do little to further the state's interest because the Amish had a long-established informal vocational education program and sought only to remove their children from schooling two years early. Id. at 222. Thus, because the state failed to "show with more particularity how its admittedly strong interest in compulsory education would be adversely affected by granting an exemption to the Amish," the Court approved the Amish's free exercise claim and held that they were exempt from the state's compulsory education requirement. Id. at 236. The Supreme Court, on the basis of First Amendment protections and "the fundamental interest of parents, as contrasted with that of the State," upheld the right of Amish parents to withdraw their children from public schools after the eighth grade in order to educate them according the Amish beliefs. (Id. at pp. 207, 232.) The Court noted: "The history and culture of Western civilization reflect a strong tradition of parental concern for the nurture and upbringing of their children. This primary role of the parents in the upbringing of their children is now established beyond debate as an enduring American tradition." (Id. at p. 232 92 S. Ct. at pp. 1541-1542.)