## Facts

- New York amended Education Law § 701 in 1965 to require public school authorities to purchase and lend textbooks, free of charge, to all resident students in grades 7–12 attending public or qualifying private schools, including parochial schools.
- Eligible textbooks were limited to those designated for use in public schools or approved by boards of education and required for a class for at least a semester.
- Several local public school boards refused to implement the law and sought declaratory and injunctive relief, asserting the statute violated the First and Fourteenth Amendments and state constitutional limits on aid to religion.
- A trial court held the law unconstitutional; an intermediate appellate court dismissed for lack of standing; the state’s highest court found standing and upheld the law as a neutral measure benefiting children regardless of school type.
- The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed.

## Issues

1. Whether a state program requiring free loans of secular textbooks to students in parochial schools constitutes a law “respecting an establishment of religion” in violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments.
2. Whether the textbook-loan requirement violates the Free Exercise Clause.

## Decision

- The Court affirmed the judgment upholding the statute.
- The statute had a secular purpose—improving educational opportunities—and functioned as a general program making textbooks available to all students.
- Limiting books to those approved by public authorities and to secular instructional materials supported a finding that the primary effect did not advance religion.
- The Court declined to invalidate the statute based on speculation that officials would approve religious books or that secular books would necessarily be used to teach religion.
- The Free Exercise challenge failed because the statute did not coerce religious practice or impose penalties on religious exercise.

## Legal Principles

- A statute is consistent with the Establishment Clause when it has a secular legislative purpose and a primary effect that neither advances nor inhibits religion.
- Neutral, generally available educational benefits directed to students (and parents), rather than to religious institutions as such, may be permissible even if religious schools incidentally benefit.
- Courts do not assume unconstitutional administration in the absence of evidence; officials are presumed able and willing to apply secular-approval limits to instructional materials.
- The Free Exercise Clause is not violated absent coercion, penalties, or other burdens on religious practice.

## Conclusion

The Court upheld New York’s requirement that public school districts lend approved secular textbooks to all eligible students, including those in parochial schools, because the program served a secular educational aim, operated neutrally, and did not, on the record presented, advance religion or burden religious exercise.


Bd. of Educ. v. Allen, 392 U.S. 236 (1968)