In the case of Lee v. Weismen the Supreme Court ruled that it was unconstitutional for a Rhode Island public school to have a member of the clergy deliver a prayer during graduation ceremonies. In 1989, Robert E. Lee, principal of Nathan Bishop Middle School, invited a rabbi to offer prayers during the graduation ceremony. He was provided with the booklet “Guidelines for Civic Occasions” and advised that the prayers should not be sectarian. Daniel Weisman, a parent of a student at the school, objected to the inclusion of prayers during the ceremony and asked for a temporary restraining order. His request was rejected and the rabbi delivered the invocation and blessing, which contained two references to "God" and one to "Lord". Say no to plagiarism. Get a custom essay on 'Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned'? Get original essay Daniel Weisman said, during an interview on C-Span, that he not only felt offended, but he approached prayer. He stated that as a Jew he is still prohibited from participating in a ritual of another religion he and his daughter were forced to do so. Subsequently, Weisman sought a permanent injunction barring Lee and other petitioners from inviting clergy to deliver invocations and blessings. to future degrees. A federal district court found the prayers unconstitutional under the so-called Lemon test that the U.S. Supreme Court had outlined in Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971). a law must have a secular purpose, its primary purpose cannot support or inhibit religion and cannot promote “excessive compliance” between the state and religious institutions (Lemon v. Kurtzman, p612). When the Court of Appeals upheld a district court ruling against the schools, Lee appealed to the Supreme Court and obtained certiorari. (https://www.oyez.org/cases/1991/90-1014) The question the Supreme Court considered in this case was whether or not a school-sponsored prayer during a graduation constituted a violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. They ultimately ruled in favor of the Weisman family. The Supreme Court used precedent that a school-sponsored prayer at school events has the effect of “endorsing” religion and is therefore unconstitutional. It violates the Establishment Clause because the school essentially favors one religion over others. This violates the second part of the lemon test and fails. Another problem is that the school informed parents that obtaining the diploma was optional; therefore hearing the prayer was optional. The Supreme Court noted that graduation is a rite of passage and that students and families should not be forced to choose between not attending graduation and complying with “state-sponsored practice.” The First Circuit's decision was upheld in a Supreme Court decision by a vote of 5 to 4. As an administrator, religion is a slippery slope because it evokes a very emotional public response. In this case, it was common practice for clergy to perform prayers during graduation ceremonies. The principal was only following in the footsteps of those who held the position before him. Before this decision, prayer was essentially forced on students. Please note: this is just an example. Get a custom paper from our expert writers now. Get a Custom Essay Until an issue is brought to the forefront and discussed, it may not be considered unconstitutional. If it weren't for Daniel Weisman and his daughter, we might still be praying at graduations, at.