Meyer v. Nebraska
- Decided
- June 4, 1923
- Docket
- 325
- Status
- Published
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
Cited 3,363 timesAbrogated in part (not yet verified)Possible negative treatment: abrogated in part (not yet verified) · STATE EX REL. ROY ALLEN v. Stone
What later courts said
- recognizing that the liberty interest protected by due process includes the right of parents "to control the education of their own" — Littlefield v. Forney Independent School District (2001)
- recognizing that the Constitution protects the right of parents to “bring up children” and “to control the education of their own” — Miller Ex Rel. MM v. Mitchell (2010)
- concluding that the statute as applied was "arbitrary and without reasonable relation to any end within the competency of the state" — Hutchins, Tiana v. DC (1999)
Each line is a later court’s own words about this case, not a summary. Read the opinion before relying on it.
How the opinion begins
Mr. Justice McReynolds delivered the opinion of the Court.
Plaintiff in error was tried and convicted in the District Court for Hamilton County, Nebraska, under an information which charged that on May 25, 1920, while an instructor in Zion Parochial School, he unlawfully taught the subject of reading in the German language to Raymond Parpart, a child of ten years, who had. not attained [*397] and successfully passed the eighth grade. The information is based upon “An act relating to the teaching of foreign languages in the State of Nebraska,” approved April 9, 1919, which follows [Laws 1919, c. 249.]:
“ Section 1. No person, individually or as a teacher, shall, in any private, denominational, parochial or public school, teach any subject to any person in any language other than the English language.
Cite this
Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390 (1923)Read the full opinion
Reading the library on this site uses your account’s daily calls, the same as the connector and the API. The Free plan needs no card. Calls a day on each plan.