## Facts

- Ohio authorized several categories of publicly funded assistance for students attending nonpublic schools, most of which were religious.
- The program included: (1) loans of secular textbooks approved for public-school use; (2) standardized tests and scoring services used in public schools; (3) speech, hearing, and psychological diagnostic services provided on nonpublic school premises by public personnel (and contracted physicians); (4) therapeutic, guidance, and remedial services provided only off nonpublic premises; (5) loans of instructional materials and equipment; and (6) transportation and related services for field trips.
- Taxpayers challenged the statute as violating the Establishment Clause.
- A three-judge federal district court upheld the statute in full.
- The Supreme Court reviewed each aid category separately because the provisions were severable.

## Issues

1. Whether lending secular textbooks to nonpublic school students violates the Establishment Clause.
2. Whether supplying standardized tests and scoring services to nonpublic school students violates the Establishment Clause.
3. Whether providing diagnostic services on nonpublic premises and therapeutic/remedial services off premises violates the Establishment Clause.
4. Whether lending instructional materials and equipment to nonpublic school students violates the Establishment Clause.
5. Whether providing field-trip transportation and related services to nonpublic school students violates the Establishment Clause.

## Decision

- Affirmed in part and reversed in part.
- Upheld the program as to: secular textbook loans; standardized testing and scoring; diagnostic services on nonpublic premises; and therapeutic/remedial services delivered off nonpublic premises.
- Invalidated the program as to: loans of instructional materials and equipment; and field-trip transportation and services.
- Remanded for further proceedings consistent with the Court’s rulings.

## Legal Principles

- Establishment Clause review applied a purpose/effect/entanglement framework, with the primary disputes centered on effect and entanglement.
- Aid directed to students and limited to secular content or secular services, delivered in a neutral manner, may be permissible when it does not function as a subsidy of religious instruction.
- Programs that are workable only through close governmental supervision of nonpublic school use, or that readily support classroom religious instruction or school-controlled religious activities, risk unconstitutional advancement of religion and excessive entanglement.
- Standardized testing and scoring administered under state control, without financial aid to the school and without nonpublic school control over drafting or scoring, may serve a secular oversight interest without impermissible religious support.
- Secular diagnostic and remedial services may be permissible when structured to minimize support for religious instruction and avoid ongoing monitoring of religious content.

## Conclusion

The Court drew a line between student-focused, secular, neutrally provided benefits (textbooks, testing, and specified diagnostic and remedial services), which were allowed, and aid that could readily support religious instruction or school-directed activities (instructional equipment and field-trip services), which was barred under the Establishment Clause.


Wolman v. Walter, 433 U.S. 229 (1977)