Second Circuit· 6/13/2003

Leebaert v. Harrington

Citations

332 F.3d 134
2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 11721

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

concluding that parents did not enjoy a fundamental right to “tell a public school what his or her child will and will not be taught”
holding that a parent did not have a right to exempt his child from health classes at school based on his moral and religious objections to their content and declining to employ strict scrutiny in coming to that conclusion
explaining that Meyer “protected ‘the subject matter … taught at… private school’ and that [] [Pierce] established a parental right to ‘send … children to a particular private school rather than a public school.’”
noting Brown in finding that heightened scrutiny was not required when a parent alleged that a school’s refusal to excuse his son from a mandatory health education course violated his free exercise and parental rights
extending Immediate to cases in which plaintiffs objections are religiously motivated
“Given our understanding of the Smith statement as dicta, we are not bound . . . to apply some stricter standard of review than the rational basis test to hybrid claims.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

33 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

23 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.