pleting these readings the school authorities required all Abington Township students to recite the Lord's Prayer. The student could be excused from doing so by a written note from a parent. In the Murray v. Curlett case a Baltimore statute required Bible reading or the recitation the Lord's Prayer at open exercises in public schools. Murray and his mother, professed atheists, challenged the prayer requirement. The Court found that in both these cases there was a violation on both the Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment since the readings and recitations were religious ceremonies and were "intended by the State to be so." Furthermore Justice Clark argued, the endowment of a parent to excuse a child from these ceremonies by a written note was irrelevant since it did not prevent the school's actions from infraction the Establishment Clause. The Wallace v. Jaffree case concerned an Alabama law-authorizing teacher to conduct regular religious prayer services and activities in school classrooms during the school day. Three of the Jaffree children attended public schools in Mobile. The question came up that did Alabama's law violate the First Amendment's Establishment Clause? The Court determined that, yes the law in fact breach the First Amendment's Establishment Clause. The Court determined the constitutionality of Alabama's prayer and meditation statue by applying the secular purpose test, which asked it the state's actual purpose was to endorse or disapprove of religion. The Court held that Alabama's passage of the prayer and meditation statute was not only a deflection from the state's duty to maintain absolute neutrality toward religion, but was and supporting signature of religion. As such, the statute clearly lacked any secular purpose as it sought to establish religion in public schools. Other cases that arose were not in violation of the Establishment Clause but in violation of the Free ...
