In Lee v. Weismen, the Supreme Court ruled that it was unconstitutional for a Rhode Island public school to require a clergy member to deliver a prayer during graduation ceremonies. In 1989, Robert E. Lee, principal of Nathan Bishop Middle School, invited a rabbi to deliver the prayers at the graduation ceremony. He was given the pamphlet “Guidelines for Civic Occasions” and advised that prayers should not be sectarian. Daniel Weisman, a parent of a student at the school, objected to the inclusion of prayers during the ceremony and requested a temporary restraining order. His request was refused and the rabbi delivered the invocation and blessing, which contained two references to "God" and one to "the Lord." Say no to plagiarism. Get a custom essay on 'Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned'? Get the original essay Daniel Weisman expressed, during an interview on C-Span, that he was not only offended, but approached by prayer. He said that as a Jew it is forbidden to participate in a ritual of another religion, and yet. He and his daughter were forced to do so. Subsequently, Weisman sought a permanent injunction prohibiting Lee and the other petitioners from inviting clergy to deliver invocations and blessings at future graduations. A federal district court declared the prayers unconstitutional under the so-called lemon test. that the United States Supreme Court had highlighted in Lemon v. Kurtzmann (1971). The lemon test is a three-part test that states that a law must have a secular purpose, that its primary purpose cannot endorse or inhibit religion, and that it cannot promote "excessive practices." “entanglement” between the state and religious institutions (Lemon v. Kurtzman, p612). When the Court of Appeals upheld a district court ruling against the schools, Lee appealed to the Supreme Court and was granted certiorari. (https://www.oyez.org/cases/1991/90-1014) The question considered by the Supreme Court in this case was whether or not a school-sponsored prayer at graduation constitutes a violation of the establishment clause in the first case. Amendment. Ultimately, they ruled in favor of the Weisman family. The Supreme Court used the precedent that a school-sponsored prayer at school events has the effect of “endorsing” religion and is therefore unconstitutional. This violates the Establishment Clause because the school essentially favors one religion over others. This violates the second part of the failed lemon test. Another problem is that the school informed parents that graduation was optional; so listening to the prayer was optional. The Supreme Court emphasized that graduation is a rite of passage and that students and families should not have to choose between not attending graduation and conforming to "state-sponsored practice ". The First Circuit's decision was upheld in a 5-4 decision by the Supreme Court. As an administrator, religion is a very slippery slope because it elicits a very emotional response from the public. In this case, it was common for clergy to offer prayers during graduation ceremonies. The director was only following in the footsteps of those who held this position before him. Before this decision, prayer was mainly imposed on students. Keep in mind: this is just a sample. Get a personalized article from our expert writers now. Get a Custom Essay Until a Problem..