- Information
- AI Chat
Case Brief 27 - Congress Reverses Goldman
American Constitutional Law: Civil Liberties (POL 226)
Wake Forest University
Recommended for you
Preview text
POL 226, Dr. Harriger – Janice Park
Congress Reverses Goldman
Facts:
Legally Relevant Facts
: After Goldman case, legislation permitted members of the armed forces to wear religious apparel indoors if the item is neat and conservative, while still permitting the Secretary of Defense to prohibit the wearing religious apparel if it interfered with the performance of military duties. The legislation passed the House but not the Senate, and both Houses acted on the legislation in 1987, and the provision was enacted into law.
Procedurally Relevant Facts
: The legislation passed the House but not the Senate.
Issue(s):
Whether the legislation permitting members of the armed forces to wear religious apparel should
be passed.
Holding:
Both Houses acted on the legislation in 1987, and the provision was enacted into law.
Reasoning:
House Action:
Mrs. Schroeder
: “The ‘neat and conservative’ standard was drawn from existing Air Force regulation, which used that term to define what jewelry members of the military may wear. The military services have opposed any such legislation.”
“indeed, what we are saying here is that the Secretary concerned may prohibit the wearing of any item of religious apparel if the circumstances are that the Secretary determines that the wearing of the item would interfere with the performance of the Member’s military duties”
Mr. Dornan
: “I cannot think of any religious devotion more unobtrusive than wearing a yarmulke ... Is there some specificity in this where it leaves – I would like to ask the gentlewoman to respond – where it leaves the military some leeway, Rastafarian hair or something, but where we can be specific in our legislative dialog that this has nothing to do with restricting something as precious, but as tiny and small, as the wearing of a yarmulke by orthodox people?
Mr. Solarz
POL 226, Dr. Harriger – Janice Park
: “I think it is important for the Members to know that the armed forces of Canada, the armed forces of the United Kingdom, the armed forces of New Zealand, all permit people in their military not only to wear yarmulkes, but also, if they are Sikhs, to wear turbans. I need hardly remind you that the most effective military force in the Middle East, the Israel Defense Forces, permits its members to wear yarmulkes. I do not think it has handicapped their ability to overcome their enemies in battle.”
Senate Action:
Mr. Lautenberg
: “The primary philosophical objection to this amendment has been that wearing visible items of religious apparel may threaten the military uniformity necessary in building unit cohesion ... I do not believe that wearing neat and conservative religious apparel threatens this principle. To the contrary, it would strengthen morale by affirming that the military is a humane and tolerant institution ... It is obvious that our services are made up of people from different faiths and ethnic backgrounds, and that diversity is America’s greatest asset. It is no secret, nor should it be ... Some of the services have argued that the neat and conservative standard will be hard to apply, forcing them to make delicate and difficult distinctions between religious garb. But the services have a successful record of using the neat and conservative standard to distinguish acceptable from unacceptable jewelry.”
Mr. Murkowski
: “I feel compelled to express my concern regarding the amendment of the Senator from New Jersey which would allow service members to wear religious apparel while in uniform. The American Legion, with over 2 million members, and the Military Coalition, representing 16 of the largest organizations for military personnel, do not support the amendment of the Senator from New Jersey.”
Mr. Glenn
He voted against the amendment. While he is doing so, he placed in the Record of a letter from the Secretary of Defense, Caspar Weinberger, opposing the amendment on the ground that it would force commanders to apply subjective criteria (“neat and conservative”) in distinguishing among religious apparel. He also placed in the Record a “20-star letter” from the Joint Chiefs of Staff, opposing the amendment
Mr. Adams
: “There are some really vital issues that need to be addressed in this bill – and while this issue is important, the fate of the nation does not hang on it”
Case Brief 27 - Congress Reverses Goldman
Course: American Constitutional Law: Civil Liberties (POL 226)
University: Wake Forest University
