Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

"Kiryas Joel" and Two Mistakes about Equality

1996; Columbia Law School; Volume: 96; Issue: 1 Linguagem: Inglês

10.2307/1123215

1945-2268

Abner S. Greene,

Political Philosophy and Ethics

new community.The problem is sharpened if we assume that the world view the group shares is a religious one.Are there limits to the governmental power that people who share a common religion may receive?Under current constitutional doctrine, some limits are clear: The group may not use its governmental power to teach religious doctrine in public schools; 23 it may not enact ordinances that are justifiable solely on religious grounds; 24 and it may not discriminate against other religions in the granting of governmental benefits or in the imposition of governmental burdens. 2 5 What makes Kiryas Joel a difficult and interesting case is that the Satmars were accused of doing none of these things. 2 6At issue was not how the Satmars were using their governmental power (no record was made on this point), but rather the very establishment of a special school district, carved out of a larger heterogeneous school district, to accommodate the Satmars' desire to educate their handicapped children away from the pressures of a setting integrated in religious and cultural terms.The Court condemned the legislation, on its face, on what can best be termed two grounds of equality.First, the Court concluded that a political line had been drawn on the basis of a religious criterion, implicating the inequality of segregation.Second, the Court expressed the concern that other similarly situated groups would not receive the same benefit as the Satmars; thus, it condemned the legislation as exhibiting favoritism. 2 7 23.See, e.g.,