The Legal and Social Infirmities of Zelman v. Simmons-Harris

Authors

  • Scott McLeod University of Minnesota

Abstract

With a spirited criticism of Zelman v. Simmons-Harris (2002), this article summarizes many arguments against the voucher decision, including the dissenting opinions of U.S. Supreme Court justices, opponents of the decision, and amicus curiae briefs from the American Jewish Committee, the Anti-Defamation League, and the Ohio School Boards Association, all of whom argued against the Cleveland Plan. In the end, the decision may prove dangerous to Catholic schools that accept public voucher monies.

Downloads

Published

2003-03-01

How to Cite

McLeod, S. (2003). The Legal and Social Infirmities of Zelman v. Simmons-Harris. Catholic Education: A Journal of Inquiry and Practice, 6(3). Retrieved from https://ejournals.bc.edu/index.php/cej/article/view/895

Issue

Vol. 6 No. 3 (2003)

Section

Focus Section

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).