Summary: Majority Opinion Throughout the Supreme Court case Edwards v. Aguillard (1987) the court debated the constitutionality of the teaching of creationism in Louisiana. This case is debated after a law in Louisiana was passed, the Balanced Treatment Act, that wherever evolutionary science was taught so must creationism science be taught. The court ruled this law unconstitutional on the primary basis that it violated the establishment clause under the first amendment of the constitution, and it failed the lemon test formed after a precedent case. The court's decision was seven to two, where Justice William J. Brennan wrote the majority opinion and the dissent was formed by Justice Antonin Scalia joined by Justice William Rehnquist. The first argument made by the majority was that it violated the establishment clause of the …show more content…
Justice Brennan wrote, “The court further concluded that the teaching of 'creation-science' and 'creationism,' as contemplated by the statute, involves teaching 'tailored to the principles' of a particular religious sect or group of sects”(482). The establishment clause provides that Congress can make no law that would violate one’s free exercise of religion. They used the precedent case Wallace v. Jaffree (1985), in which a young boy who didn't pray during school prayer time was reprimanded. His father decided to take the school to court because he believed that this was a violation of his child's freedom. The Supreme Court deemed it unconstitutional and allowed schools to have only a moment of silence. They figured student would have the opportunity to make their own decision as to how they spent this time. They continued to argue that the