# Epperson v. Arkansas

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item
Epperson v. Arkansas, 393 U.S. 97 (1968), was a United States Supreme Court case that invalidated an Arkansas statute that prohibited the teaching of human evolution in the public schools. The Court held that the First Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits a state from requiring, in the words of the majority opinion, "that teaching and learning must be tailored to the principles or prohibitions of any religious sect or dogma." The Supreme Court declared the Arkansas statute unconstitutional because it violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. After this decision, some jurisdictions passed laws that required the teaching of creation science alongside evolution when evolution was taught. These were also ruled unconstitutional by the Court in the 1987 case Edwards v. Aguillard.

## Concurring Opinions

    Black
    Harlan
    Stewart
Supreme Court of the United States
393 U.S. 97
Epperson v. Arkansas
Appeal from the Supreme Court of Arkansas
No. 7 Argued: October 16, 1968 --- Decided: November 12, 1968
Appellant Epperson, an Arkansas public school teacher, brought this action for declaratory and injunctive relief challenging the constitutionality of Arkansas' "anti-evolution" statute. That statute makes it unlawful for a teacher in any state-supported school or university to teach or to use a textbook that teaches "that mankind ascended or descended from a lower order of animals." The State Chancery Court held the statute an abridgment of free speech violating the First and Fourteenth Amendments. The State Supreme Court, expressing no opinion as to whether the statute prohibits "explanation" of the theory or only teaching that the theory is true, reversed the Chancery Court. In a two-sentence opinion it sustained the statute as within the State's power to specify the public school curriculum.
Held: The statute violates the Fourteenth Amendment, which embraces the First Amendment's prohibition of state laws respecting an establishment of religion. Pp. 102-109.
    (a) The Court does not decide whether the statute is unconstitutionally vague, since, whether it is construed to prohibit explaining the Darwinian theory or teaching that it is true, the law conflicts with the Establishment Clause. Pp. 102-103.
    (b) The sole reason for the Arkansas law is that a particular religious group considers the evolution theory to conflict with the account of the origin of man set forth in the Book of Genesis. Pp. 103, 107-109.
    (c) The First Amendment mandates governmental neutrality between religion and religion, and between religion and nonreligion. Pp. 103-107.
    (d) A State's right to prescribe the public school curriculum does not include the right to prohibit teaching a scientific theory or doctrine for reasons that run counter to the principles of the First Amendment. P. 107.
    (e) The Arkansas law is not a manifestation of religious neutrality. P. 109.
242 Ark. 922, 416 S.W.2d 322, reversed.
Eugene R. Warren argued the cause for appellants. With him on the brief was Bruce T. Bullion.
Don Langston, Assistant Attorney General of Arkansas, argued the cause for appellee. With him on the brief was Joe Purcell, Attorney General.
Briefs of amici curiae, urging reversal, were filed by Leo Pfeffer, Melvin L. Wulf, and Joseph B. Robison for the American Civil Liberties Union et al., and by Philip J. Hirschkop for the National Education Association of the United States et al.
This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse