## Facts

- The New Jersey State Board of Education adopted N.J.A.C. 6:29-7.1 (Aug. 6, 1980), requiring each local school district to develop and implement a family life education program in elementary and secondary curricula.
- The regulation replaced a prior, voluntary approach under which a minority of students received sex education.
- The Board relied on findings and data compiled by a Family Life Committee (created in 1979) citing teen pregnancy and related social and health concerns as justification for statewide instruction.
- The regulation included a parental opt-out allowing a student to be excused from parts of the program upon a signed statement that the material conflicted with the parent’s religious beliefs.
- Parents of public school students challenged the regulation, alleging violations of the Free Exercise and Establishment Clauses and asserting that the rulemaking process did not comply with the New Jersey Administrative Procedure Act (APA).
- The case was taken directly by the Supreme Court of New Jersey before argument in the Appellate Division.

## Issues

1. Whether a mandatory public school family life education requirement, with a religious opt-out, violates the Free Exercise Clause by burdening parents’ religious exercise.
2. Whether the program violates the Establishment Clause by advancing, inhibiting, or entangling the state with religion.
3. Whether the State Board complied with the New Jersey APA in promulgating the regulation.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of New Jersey upheld the regulation and rejected all constitutional and APA challenges.
- The Court found the regulation served a secular governmental objective—student education addressing significant public health and social concerns—and was neutral as to religion.
- The Court concluded any incidental burden on religious exercise was mitigated by the opt-out mechanism and did not amount to a constitutional violation.
- Applying Establishment Clause analysis, the Court held the regulation had a secular purpose, a primary effect that neither advanced nor inhibited religion, and did not create excessive entanglement.
- The Court held the Board followed required APA procedures, including investigation, proposal, public notice, and opportunities for participation.

## Legal Principles

- A neutral, generally applicable public school curriculum requirement aimed at secular educational objectives does not violate the Free Exercise Clause merely because it incidentally conflicts with some religious beliefs, particularly where reasonable exemptions reduce coercion.
- A family life education curriculum does not violate the Establishment Clause when it has a secular purpose, its primary effect is nonreligious, and implementation does not create excessive administrative involvement with religious institutions or doctrine.
- State education regulations adopted through compliant notice-and-comment rulemaking and supported by an administrative record will be sustained against APA-based procedural attacks absent material defects in the statutory process.

## Conclusion

The court sustained New Jersey’s mandatory family life education regulation because it pursued secular educational goals, remained neutral toward religion, included a religious opt-out that reduced burdens on objecting families, and was promulgated through procedures consistent with the state APA.


Smith v. Ricci, 446 A.2d 501 (N.J. 1982)