The Lemon Test, derived from the Supreme Court case Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971), is a way to evaluate whether government action violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. To pass the Lemon Test, the action must meet three criteria:
- It must have a secular purpose.
- Its primary effect must neither advance nor inhibit religion.
- It must not foster an excessive government entanglement with religion.
Given these criteria, let’s analyze the options provided:
-
Taxpayer money goes to a private religious school in order to furnish Bibles to all students.
- This would not pass the Lemon Test because the primary effect is to promote religion.
-
Taxpayer money goes to a private religious school in order to pay the salary of a school bus driver.
- This could potentially pass the Lemon Test, as the cooperation could be viewed as secular (providing transportation), but could still raise concerns about government entanglement with a religious institution.
-
Taxpayer money goes to a public school in order to pay the salary of a youth minister.
- This would not pass the Lemon Test because it would be considered endorsing a religious figure in a public setting.
-
Taxpayer money goes to a public school in order to pay for facilities used for religious meetings during instructional time.
- This would not pass the Lemon Test as it would likely be seen as allowing the promotion of religion in a public school context.
Based on this analysis, the second option, "Taxpayer money goes to a private religious school in order to pay the salary of a school bus driver," has the best chance of meeting the Lemon Test conditions; however, it may still be scrutinized depending on the specific context and case law developments. It’s important to clarify that this answer can vary based on specific legal interpretations and recent court rulings.