Summary

Portrait of Warren E. Burger Warren E. Burger Aguilar v. Felton — Dissenting Opinion

The Court today fails to demonstrate how the interaction occasioned by the program at issue presents any threat to the values underlying the Establishment Clause.
I cannot join in striking down a program that, in the words of the Court of Appeals, "has done so much good and little, if any, detectable harm." 739 F.2d 48, 72 (CA2 1984) . The notion that denying these services to students in religious schools is a neutral act to protect us from an Established Church has no support in logic, experience, or history.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Warren E. Burger Warren E. Burger Aguilar v. Felton — Dissenting Opinion

Under the guise of protecting Americans from the evils of an Established Church such as those of the 18th century and earlier times, today's decision will deny countless schoolchildren desperately needed remedial teaching services funded under Title I. The program at issue covers remedial reading, reading skills, remedial mathematics, English as a second language, and assistance for children needing special help in the learning process. The "remedial reading" portion of this program, for example, reaches children who suffer from dyslexia, a disease known to be difficult to diagnose and treat.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Warren E. Burger Warren E. Burger Aguilar v. Felton — Dissenting Opinion

Federal programs designed to prevent a generation of children from growing up without being able to read effectively are not remotely steps in that direction. It borders on paranoia to perceive the Archbishop of Canterbury or the Bishop of [p420] Rome lurking behind programs that are just as vital to the Nation's schoolchildren as textbooks, see generally Board of Education v.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature