Helms v. Picard’s Empirical Analysis
151 F.3d 347 · 1998
Citation profile
3 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Relies on Lemon v. Kurtzman · Rodriguez De Quijas v. Shearson/American Express, Inc. · Agostini v. Felton Chancellor Board of Education of the City of New York · Everson v. Board of Education · Walz v. Tax Comm'n of City of New York
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“When full-time parochial school teachers receive public funds to teach secular courses to their parochial school students under parochial school supervision, I agree that the program has the perceived and actual effect of advancing the religious aims of the church-related schools. This is particularly the case where, as here, religion pervades the curriculum and the teachers are accustomed to bring religion to play in everything they teach.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“... (2) we REVERSE the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Defendants and RENDER judgment in favor of Plaintiffs declaring that the Federal instructional materials program, 20 U.S.C. §§ 7301-7373, and its Louisiana counterpart, La.Rev.Stat.Ann. §§ 17:351-52, are unconstitutional as applied in Jefferson Parish, except as applied for the acquisition of textbooks which use is not challenged by this litigation; and (3)....”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Helms v. Picard“for the acquisition and use of instructional and educational materials, including library services and materials (including media materials), assessments, reference materials, computer software and hardware for instructional use, and other curricular materials.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.