Legal Opinion
Minersville School Dist. v. Gobitis
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Decided March 4, 1940No. 6862PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CLARK, Circuit Judge.
Eighteen big states 1 have seen fit to exert their power over a small number of little children 2 - (“and forbid them "not”). ■The method' of exercise has sometimes been by their representatives in solemn conclave assembled and sometimes, as here, by an administrative agency (School Board). The matter of exercise is in that field where, above all, or so we had supposed, power must yield to principle. In other words, the area of action is within the aura of conscience.
• The appellant School Board-is entrusted by statute of Pennsylvania with the delicate, but surely not…
2Cases cited71 opinions
- Haguer v. Committee for Industrial OrganizationSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
- Reynolds v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
- Near v. Minnesota Ex Rel. OlsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
- Stromberg v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
- Jacobson v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
66 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Minersville School District v. GobitisSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Singer Management Consultants, Inc. v. MilgramCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2011
- Barnette v. West Virginia State Board of EducationDistrict Court, S.D. West Virginia · 1942
- Cortright v. ResorDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1971
- Fulwood v. ClemmerDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1962
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.