Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/21pdf/21-418_i425.pdf
Page Number: 55.0

Cite as:  597 U. S. ____ (2022) 

15 

SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting 

vigilance inhere in the nature of schools themselves and the
young people they serve.  Two are relevant here. 

First, government neutrality toward religion is particu-
larly important in the public school context given the role 
public schools play in our society.  “ ‘The public school is at 
once the symbol of our democracy and the most pervasive
means for promoting our common destiny,’ ” meaning that 
“ ‘[i]n no activity of the State is it more vital to keep out di-
visive forces than in its schools.’ ”  Id. at 584.  Families “en-
trust public schools with the education of their children . . . 
on the understanding that the classroom will not purposely 
be used to advance religious views that may  conflict with 
the  private  beliefs  of  the  student  and  his  or  her  family.” 
Ibid.  Accordingly,  the  Establishment  Clause  “proscribes 
public  schools  from  ‘conveying  or  attempting  to  convey  a 
message that religion or a particular religious belief is fa-
vored  or  preferred’ ”  or  otherwise  endorsing  religious  be-
liefs.  Lee, 505 U. S., at 604–605 (Blackmun, J., concurring) 
(emphasis deleted).

Second,  schools  face  a  higher  risk  of  unconstitutionally 
“coerc[ing]  . . .  support  or  participat[ion]  in  religion  or  its 
exercise” than other government entities.  Id., at 587 (opin-
ion of the Court).  The State “exerts great authority and co-
ercive power” in schools as a general matter “through man-
datory attendance requirements.”  Edwards, 482 U. S., at 
584.  Moreover,  the  State  exercises  that  great  authority 
over children, who are uniquely susceptible to “subtle coer-
cive pressure.”  Lee, 505 U. S., at 588; cf. Town of Greece v. 
Galloway,  572  U. S.  565,  590  (2014)  (plurality  opinion)
(“[M]ature  adults,”  unlike  children,  may  not  be  “ ‘readily
susceptible  to  religious  indoctrination  or  peer  pressure’ ”).
Children are particularly vulnerable to coercion because of 
their “emulation of teachers as role models” and “suscepti-
bility to peer pressure.”  Edwards, 482 U. S., at 584.  Ac-
cordingly, this Court has emphasized that “the State may