首页> 外文学位 >An historical and legal analysis of United States Supreme Court decisions concerning the use of public funds to support private education through vouchers programs, and their relevance to state court decisions in four regions of the United States.
【24h】

An historical and legal analysis of United States Supreme Court decisions concerning the use of public funds to support private education through vouchers programs, and their relevance to state court decisions in four regions of the United States.

机译:对美国最高法院关于使用公共资金通过凭证计划支持私立教育的判决的历史和法律分析,以及它们与美国四个地区的州法院判决的相关性。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

The purpose of this dissertation was to provide an analysis of state and federal judiciary decisions on the constitutionality of voucher programs in different regions of the United States. The research focused on the evolution of legislative enactments and case law that were affected by changing attitudes and legal interpretations of the First Amendment establishment and freedom of religion clauses to the United States Constitution and various state constitutions. The study focused on the constitutional challenges in order to determine how the fundamental requirements that church and state remain separate and that government remain "neutral" with respect to religion affected the judicial and legislative decision making processes concerning the use of public funds through vouchers to support private education.; This research analyzed 45 United States Supreme Court decisions from 1879 to 2004 which concerned separation of church and state issues, especially those related to education.; The use of educational vouchers and the rules that govern their use differ from state to state. Some state constitutions have amendments prohibiting the use of tax money for religious schools, so that vouchers in those states might be unconstitutional at the state level even if they were determined to be constitutional at the federal level. Because there is no national standard, this dissertation analyzed state court challenges to voucher programs from 1946 to 2003. States included in the study could be placed into three categories: those permitting or supporting vouchers or tax credits (Wisconsin, Ohio and Arizona); those prohibiting vouchers or tax credits (Maine, Vermont and California), and those that have considered vouchers or tax credits, but have not reached a definitive conclusion (Florida and Louisiana). These state court decisions were grouped into four main regions of the United States (Northeast, Southern, Midwest and Western), to determine whether decisions concerning vouchers might differ from state to state as well as from region to region. In addition, letters were sent to attorneys general, commissioners of education and religious leaders in those states and their comments on voucher programs were incorporated into the research.; Finally, 31 guidelines were generated from court decisions, legislative actions and comments by attorneys, education officials and religious leaders concerning what is and what is not legal nationally as well as in the eight states included in this dissertation concerning the use of public funds to support private education. (Abstract shortened by UMI.)
机译:本文的目的是对美国不同地区代金券计划的合宪性进行州和联邦司法决策的分析。该研究的重点是立法,判例法的演变,这些变化受到对第一修正案的态度和法律解释的变化以及对美国宪法和各州宪法的宗教条款自由的影响。该研究着重于宪法方面的挑战,以确定教堂和国家分离的基本要求以及政府对宗教保持“中立”的基本要求如何影响有关通过凭证使用公共资金来支持司法和立法的决策过程私人教育。这项研究分析了1879年至2004年美国最高法院作出的45项判决,这些判决涉及教会和州问题的分离,特别是与教育有关的问题。州与州之间使用教育券的方式和使用规则有所不同。一些州宪法修正案禁止在宗教学校中使用税收,因此,即使这些州的凭证在联邦一级被确定为宪法,在这些州的凭证仍可能违宪。由于没有国家标准,因此本文分析了州法院在1946年至2003年间对代金券计划的挑战。研究中所包括的州可分为三类:允许或支持代金券或税收抵免的国家(威斯康星州,俄亥俄州和亚利桑那州);那些禁止使用优惠券或税收抵免的国家(缅因州,佛蒙特州和加利福尼亚州),以及那些已经考虑了优惠券或税收抵免但尚未得出明确结论的国家(佛罗里达州和路易斯安那州)。这些州法院的判决分为美国的四个主要地区(东北,南部,中西部和西部),以确定有关凭证的判决在各州之间以及各地区之间是否可能不同。此外,还向这些州的总检察长,教育专员和宗教领袖致信,并将他们对代金券计划的评论纳入研究。最后,根据法院的判决,立法行动和律师,教育官员和宗教领袖的意见,针对本国法律以及本州包括使用公共资金支持的八个州中的什么是什么和什么是不合法的问题,制定了31条准则私立教育。 (摘要由UMI缩短。)

著录项

  • 作者单位

    University of Bridgeport.;

  • 授予单位 University of Bridgeport.;
  • 学科 Education Administration.; Education History of.; Education Elementary.; Law.
  • 学位 Ed.D.
  • 年度 2005
  • 页码 271 p.
  • 总页数 271
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 教育;教育;初等教育;法律;
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号