~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Attorneymom ~ ~ ~ ~ ~


The child is not the mere creature of the state; those who nurture
him and direct his destiny have the right, coupled with the high
duty, to recognize and prepare him for additional obligations.


-SCOTUS, Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 1925


Home blog College "Mr. Pointy Nose" Links
Coming soon Coming soon Coming soon Contact Attorneymom Coming soon

Pierce v. Society of Sisters

"Bigotry or Patriotism? Is Our Future At Risk?"

Walter Pierce scanned the front page news as he sipped his morning coffee that early November morning. Headlines had been like this for weeks, and today's paper offered little more then the same old facts rehashed by new "experts".

Walter certainly knew his position on the issues. All children should attend public school. Period. Our government had a responsibility to ensure that our nation's children received a proper education and grew to become loyal, patriotic members of society. How anyone could disagree with such a worthy goal defied all logic in Walter's mind.

Although there were plenty of people who agreed with Walter's beliefs, his ideals had been met with strong opposition, mostly from religious groups, and the debate had grown into a political monster. This wasn't exactly what Walter had envisioned when he agreed to run for Governor of Oregon, but with the election just days away he was cautiously optimistic that, once he was elected, things would return to normal.

"KU KLUX KLAN SWEEPS CITY: Pierce wins"


Dudley Wooten sank speechless into his chair as his copy of the Morning Astorian slipped out of his fingers and fell to the floor. The elections were over, but the news hit him harder then he had anticipated. The results were in and, with only 52% of the votes, the Compulsory Education Bill had passed. The Catholic Civil Rights Association had done their best to educate the public about the dangers of the bill, but in the end, Dudley realized their pre-election efforts came up short. To make matters worse, Walter Pierce had won the election for governor.

Although it appeared the elections had settled the matter once and for all, Dudley felt a greater responsibility. With newly elected Governor Pierce in support of this dreadful legislation, Dudley knew the only hope to defend our nation's liberty was to take the battle to the courts.

Working with the National Catholic Welfare Conference, they began to raise the money needed to begin a legal battle of this magnitude. They not only feared the fundamental harm that parents rights would suffer from this law but also the possible eradication of private schools in general. The Society of Sisters of the Holy Name of Jesus, a private school and orphanage, was selected to represent the lawsuit. Attorneys were hired. The battle to protect the liberty of our nation was on.

March, 1925


Justice McReynolds looked out over the courtroom. Governor Pierce's attorney had been skillfully trying to convince the court that the government needed to manage education. "The government has a compelling interest in controlling the education of our children." he argued. "The only way to guarantee that our nation remains strong is to require all the state's children to attend government schools. The state has no control over what ideas children in private schools are being taught! The state's interest in protecting our nation against anti-American indoctrination and the development of rebellious sects is compelling. It is not unreasonable for these statutes to be subject to police power for enforcement..."

William Guthrie, a New York attorney hired to represent the Society of Sisters, leaped out of his chair. "For as worthy a goal as "Americanism" sounds," he countered, "this is government sanctioned thought control! If this law is ever enforced, it would require all students to be "standardized" by eradicating private education. This entire legislation is based on nothing more then paranoid fears that citizens who are not white-protestant can't be trusted. If we force all parents to send their children to public school, we criminalize the right of parents to "control the education of their own," which this court said in Meyers v. Nebraska is a liberty protected by the 14th amendment..."

It would be a nerve-wracking ten weeks while everyone awaited the court's decision.

June 1, 1925


Justice McReynolds authored the opinion of the court. The USSC had unanimously voted. As William Guthrie read the decision, a knot began to form in the pit of his stomach. It wasn't looking good for the Society of Sisters.

"The state has power to reasonably regulate all schools, to require that all children of proper age attend some school, to ensure that the teachers are of good moral character and patriotic disposition and that certain subjects essential to good citizenship are taught. The state has the authority to prevent schools from teaching anything that is clearly detrimental to the public's welfare..."

"How could this be?" Guthrie wondered. Had they lost the case? His muscles began to relax as he quickly scanned the rest of the document, and realized that Justice McReynolds wasn't finished:

"With no peculiar circumstances or present emergencies which demand extraordinary measures, it is obvious that this law unreasonably interferes with the liberty of parents and guardians to direct the upbringing and education of children under their control."

"The theory of liberty...excludes any general power of the state to standardize its children by forcing them to accept instruction from public teachers only. The child is not a mere creature of the state; those who nurture him and direct his destiny have the right, coupled with the high duty, to recognize and prepare him for additional obligations. (Emphasis added by me)

And with that, it was settled. By trying to eliminate all educational options, other than their own schools, the government had overstepped their authority. Uniformity of children is not a reasonable or compelling government interest. Children are not mere creatures of the state. Parents, and not the state, have the right to direct their children's destiny.

Freedom is without meaning if you cannot exercise it." Charles R. Glenn, Boston University


Disclaimer: I am not an attorney, nothing I say is legal advice, and be aware that I took some writers liberty to develop the story (i.e. I have no idea if Governor Pierce drank coffee or orange juice). I would encourage you to read the 1925 Pierce v. Society of Sisters decision for yourself.




The opinions expressed through this website and blog are the opinions of the site owner. This website is NOT
a substitute for counsel from a private attorney. Family law situations are often complex, and laws vary from
state to state. If you are in need of legal advice, PLEASE seek a living, breathing, flesh-and-blood attorney in your state.
©2006, Attorneymom


Free Counters
Office Max Coupons

(Visits to this page)

(Visitors to this site)
Accredited Online Degree Programs
Accredited Online Degree Programs

(Pages visited at this site)