Jump to content

Marsh v. Chambers

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Faithful27 (talk | contribs) at 13:28, 16 May 2013 (1791 date added). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Marsh v. Chambers
Argued April 20, 1983
Decided July 5, 1983
Full case nameFrank Marsh, State Treasurer et al. v. Ernest Chambers
Citations463 U.S. 783 (more)
103 S.Ct. 3330, 77 L.Ed.2d 1019
Case history
PriorInjunction granted, 504 F.Supp. 585 (D. Neb. 1980); injunction was affirmed and expounded upon, 675 F.2d 228 (8th Cir. 1982); certiorari granted, 459 U.S. 966 (1982)
Holding
The practice of hiring a chaplain for the Nebraska state legislature did not violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
Court membership
Chief Justice
Warren E. Burger
Associate Justices
William J. Brennan Jr. · Byron White
Thurgood Marshall · Harry Blackmun
Lewis F. Powell Jr. · William Rehnquist
John P. Stevens · Sandra Day O'Connor
Case opinions
MajorityBurger, joined by White, Blackmun, Powell, Rehnquist, O'Connor
DissentBrennan, joined by Marshall
DissentStevens
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amend. I

Marsh v. Chambers, 463 U.S. 783 (1983),[1] was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that government funding for chaplains was constitutional because of the "unique history" of the United States. Three days before the ratification of the First Amendment in 1791, containing the Establishment clause, the federal legislature authorized hiring a chaplain for opening sessions with prayer.

Nebraska state senator Ernie Chambers sued in federal court claiming that the legislature's practice of opening sessions with a prayer offered by a state-supported chaplain was in violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The district court held that the prayer did not violate the Constitution, but that state support for the chaplain did. The 8th Circuit Court of Appeals held that both practices violated the Constitution. Justice Brennan, with Justice Marshall joining, wrote in a dissenting opinion, "The Court makes no pretense of subjecting Nebraska's practice of legislative prayer to any of the formal "tests" that have traditionally structured our inquiry under the Establishment Clause. That it fails to do so is, in a sense, a good thing, for it simply confirms that the Court is carving out an exception to the Establishment Clause, rather than reshaping Establishment Clause doctrine to accommodate legislative prayer."[1]

See also

References

  • ^ Text of Marsh v. Chambers, 463 U.S. 783 (1983) is available from: Findlaw Justia