# data[].attributes.body
Students will gain an in-depth understanding of the background, key figures, and the events leading up to the West Side Community Schools v. Mergens case.

# data[].attributes.body
Learners will analyze and understand the legal arguments presented by both sides in the West Side Community Schools v. Mergens case.

# data[].attributes.body
Students will dissect and comprehend the Supreme Court's decision and its implications for student-led groups in schools.

# data[].attributes.body
Provide students with access to copies of the official court documents related to the case for analysis.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Issue: Student Clubs Bottom Line: Public Schools That Allow Student-Interest Clubs Cannot Exclude Religious or Political Ones Background
Bridget Mergens was a senior at Westside High School in Omaha, Nebraska. She asked her homeroom teacher, who was also the school's principal, for permission to start an after-school Christian club. Westside High already had about 30 clubs, including a chess club and a scuba-diving club. The principal denied Bridget's request, telling her that a religious club would be illegal in a public school.

The year before, in 1984, Congress had addressed this issue in the Equal Access Act, which required public schools to allow religious and political clubs if they let students form other kinds of student-interest clubs. When Bridget challenged the principal's decision, her lawsuit became the Supreme Court's test case for deciding whether the Equal Access Act was constitutional under what is known as the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
Ruling
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Bridget. Allowing students to meet on campus to discuss religion after school did not amount to state sponsorship of religion, the Court said: "We think that secondary-school students are mature enough and are likely to understand that a school does not endorse or support student speech that it merely permits."
Impact
If a public school allows only clubs tied to the school curriculum, it can exclude clubs that don't connect to its educational mission. But once a school allows student-interest clubs-such as a scuba-diving club, environmental club, or jazz club-it cannot exclude religious clubs, political clubs, gay-lesbian clubs, or other groups.

If the club is religious in nature, however, the school must refrain from active involvement or sponsorship, so that it doesn't run afoul of the Establishment Clause, the Court said.

Source: West Side Community Schools v. Mergens (1990)
Copyright 2009 The New York Times Company

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
West Side Community Schools v. Mergens (1990)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Exploros, The U.S. Constitution, The Bill of Rights, West Side Community Schools v. Mergens (1990)

# data[].attributes.body
A comprehensive video detailing the background, legal arguments, and the Supreme Court's decision in the West Side Community Schools v. Mergens case.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Board of Education of Westside Community Schools v. Mergens Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained

# data[].attributes.body
Use Padlet for students to collaboratively analyze legal documents and share insights about the case. This promotes active engagement and peer learning.

# data[].attributes.body
A script for a mock trial that simulates the West Side Community Schools v. Mergens case, allowing students to role-play the proceedings.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Westside Community Board of Education v. Mergens

Full case name
Board of Education of the Westside Community Schools, etc., et al., Petitioners v. Bridget C. Mergens, by and through her next friend, Daniel N. Mergens, et al.

Citations

496 U.S. 226 (more)

Prior

867 F.2d 1076 ( 8th Cir. 1989); cert. granted, 492 U.S. 917 (1989).

School districts may not prohibit Bible study groups from meeting on school premises if they allow other groups to meet on school premises.

Chief Justice

William Rehnquist

Associate Justices

William J. Brennan Jr. · Byron White
Thurgood Marshall · Harry Blackmun
John P. Stevens · Sandra Day O'Connor
Antonin Scalia · Anthony Kennedy

Majority

O'Connor (parts I, II-A, II-B, II-C), joined by Rehnquist, White, Blackmun, Scalia, Kennedy

Plurality

O'Connor (part III), joined by Rehnquist, White, Blackmun

Concurrence

Kennedy, joined by Scalia

Concurrence

Marshall, joined by Brennan

Dissent

Stevens

U.S. Const. amend. I; Equal Access Act

Westside Community Board of Education v. Mergens, 496 U.S. 226 (1990), was a United States Supreme Court case involving a school district's ability to hold classes on Bible study after school.

Westside High School, in District 66, located in Omaha, Nebraska, refused to allow a group of students to form a Christian Bible Study Club within their school. Bridget Mergens is the name of the student who initiated the process to start the club. She was a senior at the time. It was decided that the club could not take place because they would not allow a staff member to sponsor it (staff sponsoring was required or the club meetings could not take place at the school). The students argued that the district's decision was in violation of the federal Equal Access Act requiring that groups seeking to express messages containing "religious, political, philosophical, or other content" not be denied the ability to form clubs.

In an 8-1 decision, the Court held that denying equal access to the religious club violated the Equal Access Act, and that treating a religious club equally, including providing a sponsor like other clubs, would not constitute an endorsement of religion prohibited by the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

The school's situation was placed under the Equal Access Act because it allowed other 'limited open forums'. In Part III of Justice O'Connor's opinion, which did not reach a majority of the Court, she applied the Lemon Test to find that the Equal Access Act is constitutional as applied in this case. Justice Kennedy, meanwhile, analyzed the application of the Act under different Court precedents, focusing more upon "coercion".

Justice Stevens, in a dissenting opinion, would have avoided the Establishment Clause issue.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Westside Community Board of Education v. Mergens - Wikipedia

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Westside Community Board of Education v. Mergens Full case name Board of Education of the Westside Community Schools, etc., et al., Petitioners v. Bridget C. Mergens, by and through her next friend, Daniel N. Mergens, et al. Citations 496 U.S. 226 (more ) Prior 867 F.2d 1076 ( 8th Cir.

# data[].attributes.body
Begin with a class discussion on the background of the case, focusing on the significance of student-led groups in schools and religious freedom.

# data[].attributes.body
In groups, students will analyze provided court documents to identify key arguments and evidence presented by both sides.

# data[].attributes.body
Organize a class debate where students represent different sides of the case, presenting and defending their legal arguments.

# data[].attributes.body
Students will dissect the Supreme Court's decision, discussing its significance and implications on student freedom and club activities within schools.

# data[].attributes.body
Students will use Padlet to create presentations summarizing their understanding of the case, focusing on their analysis of legal documents and the case's impact on student rights.

# data[].attributes.body
Students will submit a reflection paper analyzing the significance of the West Side Community Schools v. Mergens case and its impact on student rights and religious freedom within schools.

# data[].attributes.body
Groups will present their Padlet presentations to the class, showcasing their analysis and understanding of the West Side Community Schools v. Mergens case.

# data[].attributes.body
Conclude with a class discussion reflecting on the lessons learned from the case study, emphasizing the importance of understanding legal rights within educational settings.

# data[].attributes.body
For homework, students are tasked with finding a similar court case and comparing its outcomes to the West Side Community Schools v. Mergens case, highlighting similarities and differences.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Westside Community Board of Education v. Mergens

Full case name
Board of Education of the Westside Community Schools, etc., et al., Petitioners v. Bridget C. Mergens, by and through her next friend, Daniel N. Mergens, et al.

Citations

496 U.S. 226 (more)

Prior

867 F.2d 1076 ( 8th Cir. 1989); cert. granted, 492 U.S. 917 (1989).

School districts may not prohibit Bible study groups from meeting on school premises if they allow other groups to meet on school premises.

Chief Justice

William Rehnquist

Associate Justices

William J. Brennan Jr. · Byron White
Thurgood Marshall · Harry Blackmun
John P. Stevens · Sandra Day O'Connor
Antonin Scalia · Anthony Kennedy

Majority

O'Connor (parts I, II-A, II-B, II-C), joined by Rehnquist, White, Blackmun, Scalia, Kennedy

Plurality

O'Connor (part III), joined by Rehnquist, White, Blackmun

Concurrence

Kennedy, joined by Scalia

Concurrence

Marshall, joined by Brennan

Dissent

Stevens

U.S. Const. amend. I; Equal Access Act

Westside Community Board of Education v. Mergens, 496 U.S. 226 (1990), was a United States Supreme Court case involving a school district's ability to hold classes on Bible study after school.

Westside High School, in District 66, located in Omaha, Nebraska, refused to allow a group of students to form a Christian Bible Study Club within their school. Bridget Mergens is the name of the student who initiated the process to start the club. She was a senior at the time. It was decided that the club could not take place because they would not allow a staff member to sponsor it (staff sponsoring was required or the club meetings could not take place at the school). The students argued that the district's decision was in violation of the federal Equal Access Act requiring that groups seeking to express messages containing "religious, political, philosophical, or other content" not be denied the ability to form clubs.

In an 8-1 decision, the Court held that denying equal access to the religious club violated the Equal Access Act, and that treating a religious club equally, including providing a sponsor like other clubs, would not constitute an endorsement of religion prohibited by the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

The school's situation was placed under the Equal Access Act because it allowed other 'limited open forums'. In Part III of Justice O'Connor's opinion, which did not reach a majority of the Court, she applied the Lemon Test to find that the Equal Access Act is constitutional as applied in this case. Justice Kennedy, meanwhile, analyzed the application of the Act under different Court precedents, focusing more upon "coercion".

Justice Stevens, in a dissenting opinion, would have avoided the Establishment Clause issue.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Westside Community Board of Education v. Mergens - Wikipedia

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Westside Community Board of Education v. Mergens Full case name Board of Education of the Westside Community Schools, etc., et al., Petitioners v. Bridget C. Mergens, by and through her next friend, Daniel N. Mergens, et al. Citations 496 U.S. 226 (more ) Prior 867 F.2d 1076 ( 8th Cir.