Jewish Congress Considers Miami Rulings ‘a Victory for Religious Freedom’

Attorneys for the American Jewish Congress and the American Civil Liberties Union today termed “a victory for religious freedom” three key rulings in the decision of a Dade County, Fla., court in Miami’s religion-in-the schools case.

At the same time, they announced they would appeal other parts of an opinion by Circuit Judge J. Fritz Gordon that upheld Bible reading and the recitation of the Lord’s Prayer in public schools. The appeal on these sections of the decision will be vigorously pressed, the two organizations said, “because of our belief that these practices violate the church-state separation principle of the First Amendment.”

The AJCongress and ACLU, which represented five parents in challenging sectarian practices in the Miami schools, said they were “highly gratified” at these “precedent-making rulings by Judge Gordon:

“1. For the first time in American history, a court has prohibited sectarian holiday observances in public schools such as those depicting the Nativity and Crucifixion of Jesus.

“2. For the first time in American history, a court has prohibited the showing of religious movies in public schools.

“3. For the first time in Florida, a court has prohibited the use of school facilities for after-school religious classes by church groups.”

These “land-mark rulings,” according to a joint AJCongress-ACLU statement, “signal a historic advance in the effort to protect the public school child from invasions of his religious conscience, a protection embedded in the separation of principle of the First Amendment. This is not an attack on religion per se, or the ‘free exercise thereof’ clause of the First Amendment, as those who oppose this suit have claimed,” the statement declared.

The statement noted that “in ruling that the Bible may be read in school without comment, Judge Gordon made clear that ‘there is nothing in the Florida law that requires a student be told that it is a quote from the Bible or that the student should be told from what book or verse the quotation was taken.’ Particularly significant,” the two organizations commented, “was the Judge’s statement that ‘if so, it might be considered sectarian comment, which is forbidden by the Statute and the court is not passing on that point of law.’

“Judge Gordon made clear,” the AJCongress’ ACLU state mendadded, “that he based his ruling upholding Bible reading on the finding of fact that ‘there is no evidence before the court except in an isolated incident that any comment or explanation was made on the verse read from the Bible and there is express restriction in the act itself from so doing.’ “

“We note,” the statement added, “that the decision did not hold Bible readings per se to be a breach of the wall of separation between church and state. The question of the constitutionality of the Florida state’s Bible reading law, therefore, still awaits a final decision. We plan to press our appeal on this point to the Florida Supreme Court and eventually to the U.S. Supreme Court.”