Pierce, Governor of Oregon, et al. v. Society of Sisters

PIERCE, GOVERNOR OF OREGON, et al. v. SOCIETY OF SISTERS
	Term: 1924
Important Dates
	Argued: March 16, 1925
	Decided: June 1, 1925
Outcome
	Affirmed (includes modified)
Vote
	9-0
Majority
	Louis Dembitz Brandeis • Pierce Butler • Oliver Wendell Holmes • James Clark McReynolds • Edward Terry Sanford • Harlan Fiske Stone • George Sutherland • William Howard Taft • Willis Van Devanter

Pierce, Governor of Oregon, et al. v. Society of Sisters is a case that was decided by the Supreme Court of the United States on June 1, 1925. The case was argued before the court on March 16, 1925.

In a 9-0 opinion, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the ruling of the U.S. District Court for Oregon. The U.S. Supreme Court held that Oregon Measure Nos. 314-315, which required children to attend public schools, violated the Fourteenth Amendment by interfering with parents' rights to choose private education.^[1]

For a full list of cases decided in the 1920s, click here.
For a full list of cases decided by the Taft Court, click here.

Background

Oregon Measure Nos. 314-315

See also: Oregon Measure Nos. 314-315, Require Children to Attend Public School Initiative (1922)

On November 7, 1922, voters approved Oregon Measure Nos. 314-315, an initiated state statute requiring children between eight and sixteen to attend a public school, with exceptions. The ballot measure added Section 5259 to Oregon Laws. The following underlined text was added:^[2]

Sec. 5259. Children Between the Ages of Eight and Sixteen Years — Any parent, guardian or other person in the State of Oregon, having control or charge or custody of a child under the age of sixteen years and of the age of eight years or over at the commencement of a term of public school of the district in which said child resides, who shall fail or neglect or refuse to send such child to a public school for the period of time a public school shall be held during the current year in said district, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and each day's failure to send such child to a public school shall constitute a separate offense; provided, that in the following cases, children shall not be required to attend public schools:

(a) Children Physically Unable — Any child who is abnormal, subnormal or physically unable to attend school.

(b) Children Who Have Completed the Eighth Grade — Any child who has completed the eighth grade, in accordance with the provisions of the state course of study.

(c) Distance from school — Children between the ages of eight and ten years, inclusive, whose place of residence is more than one and one-half miles, and children over ten years of age whose place of residence is more than three miles, by the nearest traveled road, from a public school; provided, however, that if transportation to and Page 531 from school is furnished by the school district, this exemption shall not apply.

If any parent, guardian or other person having control or charge or custody of any child between the ages of eight and sixteen years, shall fail to comply with any provision of this section, he shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and shall, on conviction thereof, be subject to a fine of not less than $5, nor more than $100, or to imprisonment in the county jail not less than two nor more than thirty days, or by both such fine and imprisonment in the discretion of the court.

This Act shall take effect and be and remain in force from and after the first day of September, 1926.

Outcome

Opinion

Justice James Clark McReynolds wrote the court's unanimous opinion:^[1]

“

Under the doctrine of Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390, we think it entirely plain that the Act of 1922 unreasonably interferes with the liberty of parents and guardians to direct the upbringing and education of children under their control: as often heretofore pointed out, rights guaranteed by the Constitution may not be abridged by legislation which has no reasonable relation to some purpose within the competency of the State.

The fundamental theory of liberty upon which all governments in this Union repose excludes any general power of the State to standardize its children by forcing them to accept instruction from public teachers only. The child is not the mere creature of the State; those who nurture him and direct his destiny have the right, coupled with the high duty, to recognize and prepare him for additional obligations.^[3]

”

Text

The court decision is available here.

Legacy

The following are perspectives from legal scholars on the significance of Pierce v. Society of Sisters:

William G. Ross, the Albert P. Brewer Professor of Law and Ethics at Samford University's Cumberland School of Law: "Together with Meyer, Pierce established the principle that the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prevents the states from imposing unreasonable limitations on non-economic personal liberties, which laid the foundation for the Court’s development of a right to privacy in later cases. In doing so, these cases marked the start of the transformation of the Court from a guardian of property rights into its modern role as a beacon of personal liberties. ... Few Supreme Court decisions have meant so many things to so many people, and few have been used in support of so many diverse constitutional theories and doctrines."^[4]

Paul E. Peterson, the Henry Lee Shattuck Professor of Government at Harvard University: “ But not until Oregon voted to ban nonpublic schools did any state attempt to restrict a family’s right to educate their child as they please. When Pierce struck down that infamous amendment to Oregon law, it was not breaking new ground but formally legitimizing a settled practice. Pierce nonetheless opened windows to the future. The decision made clear that alternatives to public education were deeply embedded in a political tradition that gave precedence to the rights of the individual over the needs of the state. ... Pierce did not launch the school choice movement, but 100 years ago it laid the groundwork to advance the education options families enjoy today."^[5]