THE MACHINE

Click Here to Go Back

YODER TRIAL

Wisconsin v. Yoder
1971
Background Information
Three Amish families sued the state of Wisconsin over its requirement that children be enrolled in school until the age of sixteen. The parents refused to comply by removing their children from school after they completed the eighth grade and continued their education at home, emphasizing domestic and farming skills. Further education would present their children with too much exposure to the "evil world."

The families claimed that their rights to freely exercising their religion were not being respected. The Wisconsin Supreme Court found in favor of the Amish parents.

Court Decision
Arguments were heard on December 8th, 1971. On May 15th 1972 the Court ruled 6 to 1 that the compulsory education law in Winconsin did indeed violate the Free Exercise Clause.

Justice Burger wrote in his majority opinion that the Amish have a legitimate reason for removing their children from school prior to their attending high school. The qualities emphasized higher education (self-distinction, competitiveness, scientific accomplishment, etc.) are contrary to Amish values.

The Court first determined that the beliefs of the Amish were indeed religiously based and of great antiquity. Next, the Court rejected the State's arguments that the Free Exercise Clause extends no protection because the case involved "action" or "conduct" rather than belief, and because the regulation, neutral on its face, did not single out religion.

Instead, the Court went on to analyze whether a "compelling" governmental interest required such "grave interference" with Amish belief and practices. The governmental interest was not the general provision of education, inasmuch as the State and the Amish were in agreement on education through the first eight grades and since the Amish provided their children with additional education of a primarily vocational nature.

The State's interest was really that of providing two additional years of public schooling. Nothing in the record, felt the Court, showed that this interest outweighed the great harm which it would do to traditional Amish religious beliefs to impose the compulsory ninth and tenth grade attendance. Such attendance in high school hinders the Amish community by depriving them of the labor of their children and limiting their ability to instill appropriate values in their adolescents.

In his dissent, Justice Douglas argued that the children should have been heard on their desire to attend school and continue with the Amish religion - the decision only relied upon the interests of the state and parents, ignoring the primary party affected. In addition, he questioned the wisdom in limiting exemptions to laws like compulsory eduction to formal religious communities. Other scholars later joined Douglas in arguing that people with more individualistic moral choices based upon secular grounds should not be granted less consideration in such matters.

Significance
The Court's Court Decision prevented states from asserting an absolute right to institute compulsive high school education. By preventing parents from removing their children from school, the State was intruding into the family and preventing them from instilling their faiths in their children. Unfortunately, the potential interests and rights of the children were totally ignored.