FREE ESSAY ON MUELLER V. ALLEN

MUELLER V. ALLEN

MUELLER V. ALLEN
Issue:
Did the government violate the Establishment Clause because they provided monetary
support to the parents of all school-goers?
Rule:
The 1st Amendment states that the Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment
of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.
Analysis:
In 1983, case of Mueller v. Allen, made a few changes in the way the federal government
helped out the children in schools. The question in the Mueller case was a Minnesota
statute that allowed all parents to deduct tuition, textbook and transportation expenses
from their gross income on state tax returns for their children attending elementary and
secondary schools. The Minnesota law allowed a tax deduction of up to $500 for each child
in grades K through 6, and up to $700 for each child in grades 7 through 12. Given that
most parents of public school children incurred no tuition expenses, and that at the time
96 percent of Minnesota children in private schools attended religiously affiliated ones
[1978-1979], it was clear that the bulk of the tax deductions would go to parents of
children in private schools. 
A group of Minnesota taxpayers brought suit against the Minnesota commissioner of revenue
and Minnesota parents who had taken the tax deduction for expenses incurred in sending
their children to parochial schools. The suit alleged that the law violated the
Establishment Clause, because it gave financial assistance to sectarian institutions,
which was a link between church and state.
Conclusion:
Justice Rehnquist's opinion in the Mueller case made a major distinction between direct
aid and indirect aid to parochial schools. He said: It is true, of course, that financial
assistance provided to parents ultimately has an economic effect comparable to that of
aid given directly to the schools attended by their children. It is also true, however,
that under Minnesota's arrangement public funds become available only as a result of
numerous private choices of individual parents of school-age children. 
The Court concluded that under the Mueller Court's view, this type of indirect aid is
consistent with the neutrality principle explained in the Establishment Clause because it
neither advances nor inhibits religion.