Epperson Vs Arkansas

A. Summary of the Case

Epperson Vs Arkansas is one of the landmark cases that was delivered by the United
States Supreme Court. The decision had the effect of striking down an Arkansas law that had
banned the teaching of evolution in municipal schools (Larson, 2003). The Supreme Court ruled
that the law was unconstitutional and was out of sync with the First Amendment. The court
declared the law to be unconstitutional since it was a violation of the Establishment Clause of the
First Amendment. The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment mandates Congress not to
pass any law that seeks to hinder the exercise of the citizen’s rights to exercise the religion of
their choice. It prevents the government from passing legislation aimed at controlling religion
(Larson, 2003). Both the Federal government and state governments are barred from establishing
or sponsoring a religion. The state of Arkansas had done the opposite and passed a law that
prohibited the teaching of evolution owing to the fact that evolution contradicts Christian
principles. The result was a legal battle that culminated in the United States Supreme Court.

B. Case Outline

Name of the Case: Epperson Vs Arkansas
Facts of the Case
The Little Rock, Arkansas, school district approved a new biology textbook in 1965 that
featured evolution theory. Although no teacher had been prosecuted for teaching evolution, a
new biology teacher Susan Epperson moved to court seeking a declaratory action that would
ensure that she would not be prosecuted for using teaching using the text (Larson, 2003). In

3
Arkansas, there was a statute that was in force that prohibited the teaching of evolution in
schools. The law had been passed in 1928 and mirrored the Buttler Act passed in the state of
Tennessee (Moore, 1999). Susan thus moved to the Chancery Court in Pulaski County and
sought to have the courts declare the law null and void.
History of the Case:
The case was filed in 1966, with the Chancery Court delivering its verdict in the same
year. The Chancery Court, in its decision, stated that the statute violated the Fourteenth
Amendment of the United States Constitution. The Fourteenth Amendment and the First
Amendment to the United States Constitution shield citizens against any interference to their
freedom of speech (Moore, 1999). The court also ruled that the statute contradicted the First and
Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution that give citizens the right to freedom
of thought. In its findings, the court noted that the statute limited the quest for knowledge and, in
so doing, enforces restrictions on the freedom to learn (Larson, 2003). Further, the
implementation of the statute restraints teachers from teaching without interference.
The state appealed the decision to the Arkansas Supreme Court. The Supreme Court
sided with the state and reversed the decision of the lower court. The Arkansas Supreme Court
held that the statute was in line with the state’s power to dictate the curriculum that has to be
followed in public schools. The implication of the decision is that the ban on teaching evolution
was reaffirmed. Epperson moved to the United Supreme Court seeking the reversal of the
decision. The case began in 1968, and the court announced its decision in the same year. The
decision was a unanimous one (Moore, 1999). The United States Supreme Court reached a
unanimous decision that the State’s Supreme Court had erred in reversing the decision of the
junior court. The United States Supreme Court indicated that that the law had been passed with a

4
view of protecting a certain religious view. To this end, it was unconstitutional and therefore null
and void. The United States Supreme Court held that the state ought to have no interest in
regulating religion and protecting the citizens against any religious views that they found
inappropriate. The decision was written by both Justice Abe Fortas and Justice Hugo Black.
Justice Fortas wrote the decision of the majority and stated that government could not be
antagonistic to any religion. Justice Hugo Black found the statute to be unconstitutionally vague.
He dissented from the majority on the finding that the law contradicted the First Amendment.
Legal Questions:
Though the case raised several questions, the issues can be crystallized into whether or
not the statute in Arkansas criminalizing the teaching of evolution was unconstitutional?
Decision or Holdings and Reasons Behind the Decision
The United States Supreme Court declared the Arkansas statute to be unconstitutional.
The majority held that the statutes were in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment that embraces
the provisions set out by the First Amendment. The decision of the majority led by Justice Abe
Fortas was that the Arkansas law was passed to restrict evolution which was considered by a
particular religious group to be in contradiction with their account on the origin of man as set out
in the Bible. The provisions of the First Amendment require that the government takes a neutral
stance when dealing with religion as well as nonreligion (Moore, 1999). While the state has a
right to dictate the curriculum, the right does not extend to prohibiting the teaching of a scientific
theory. Justice Hugo Black dissented and held that the Arkansas law was vague. He, however,
agreed with the majority that the decision of the state Supreme Court needed to be reversed.

C. Conclusion

5
The United States Supreme Court in Epperson Vs Arkansas made a landmark decision
that had a huge impact on the citizens of the United States. The court stated that the First
Amendment aimed at building a wall between the church and the government. The decision
mandated governments not to show religious favorism in passing laws that are against certain
religious views. Governments must ensure that they embrace religious neutrality and protect the
citizens’ fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution.

6

References

Larson, E. J. (2003). Trial and error: the American controversy over creation and evolution.
Oxford University Press.
Moore, R. (1999). Creationism in the United States: IV. The aftermath of Epperson v.
Arkansas. The American Biology Teacher, 61(1), 10-16.