Opinion ID: 2073549
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Federal Constitutional Grounds

Text: The First Amendment requires strict governmental neutrality with respect to religion. Since it is applicable to the states, the broad scope of the amendment directs that government ... shall make no law respecting an establishment of a religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. These two provisions are in tension. Where the `establishment clause' confronts the `free exercise clause,' the founding fathers who drew this constitutional provision intended that the `free exercise clause' be dominant. Valent v. N.J. State Bd. of Ed. et. als., 114 N.J. Super. 63, 72 (Ch. Div. 1971). However, this is not a free exercise case. ... [I]t is necessary in a free exercise case for one to show the coercive effect of the enactment as it operates against him in the practice of his religion. The distinction between the two clauses is apparent  a violation of the Free Exercise Clause is predicated on coercion while the Establishment Clause violation need not be so attended. [ Abington School District v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203, 223, 83 S.Ct. 1560, 1572, 10 L.Ed. 2d 844, 858 (1963)] The only issue of concern to us is whether permitting religious groups to rent public school facilities at a rate reflective of the cost incurred by the school board as a result of such use runs afoul of the establishment clause. The `establishment of religion' clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another.... No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion.