Doe Ex Rel. Doe v. ELMBROOK SCHOOL DIST.
658 F.3d 710
7th Cir.2011Background
- Elmbrook School District held high school graduations at Elmbrook Church sanctuary for many years, paying rental fees; Central and East schools initially used gymnasiums but shifted to church for its amenities and cost benefits; church environment is overtly Christian with permanent crosses and religious literature present during ceremonies; the Does are non-Christian families with minor children who felt offended by the church setting; the district officials had limited involvement with selecting the church, and the district later moved to a field house for graduations indicating a changed practice; the district argued the church use was secular, cost-effective, and merely rented space rather than endorsing religion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether graduation in a church is coercive under Lee v. Weisman | Does argue coercion due to sacred space and visibility of symbols | Elmbrook contends exposure to symbols is passive and non-coercive | No coercion; exposure was passive and not an unconstitutional compulsion |
| Whether the practice has the primary effect of endorsing religion under Lemon | Does claim endorsement of the church’s beliefs and religion | District asserts secular purpose and context neutralizes endorsement | No primary religious endorsement; context and secular purpose negate Lemon violation |
| Whether there is excessive entanglement with religion | Does allege state involvement through symbol removal and church relations | Interaction was de minimis and rental arrangement is neutral | No excessive entanglement; relationships and costs did not show government control of religion |
| Whether the case is moot due to voluntary cessation | Damages claims remain; past use keeps live issues | District ceased church usage and claims mootness | Not moot; potential recurrence and lack of formal policy change keep live issues |
| Whether anonymous litigation was proper | Does seeks anonymity due to retaliatory fear; governing standards apply | Anonymity not contested; district court balanced privacy/public interest | District court did not abuse discretion; anonymity permissible in this record |
Key Cases Cited
- Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 (U.S. 1971) (establishes Lemon test for Establishment Clause)
- Lee v. Weisman, 505 U.S. 577 (U.S. 1992) (coercion in school-sponsored religious activities)
- Santa Fe Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Doe, 530 U.S. 290 (U.S. 2000) (student-led prayer and endorsement concerns in school settings)
- McCreary Cnty. v. ACLU, 545 U.S. 844 (U.S. 2005) (contextual analysis of displays and endorsement)
- County of Allegheny v. ACLU, 492 U.S. 573 (U.S. 1989) (endorsement/entanglement considerations with religious displays)
- Agostini v. Felton, 521 U.S. 203 (U.S. 1997) (rejected taint from religious presence on public education)