U.S. Supreme Court: Meyer v.

Nebraska school, teach any subject to any person in any language

Argued: February 23, 1923 Decided: June 4, 1923 "Sec. 2. Languages, other than the English language, may
be taught as languages only after a pupil shall have
ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF attained and successfully passed the eighth grade as
NEBRASKA evidenced by a certificate of graduation issued by the
county superintendent of the county in which the child
resides."
Syllabus
"Sec. 3. Any person who violates any of the provisions of
A state law forbidding, under penalty, the teaching in this act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and
any private, denominational, parochial or public school, upon conviction, shall be subject to a fine of not less
of any modern language, other than English, to any child than twenty-five dollars ($25), nor more than one
who has not attained and successfully hundred dollars ($100) or be confined in the county jail
for any period not exceeding thirty days for each
Page 262 U. S. 391 offense."

passed the eighth grade, invades the liberty guaranteed "Sec. 4. Whereas, an emergency exists, this act shall be
by the Fourteenth Amendment and exceeds the power in force from and after its passage and approval."
of the State. P. 262 U. S. 399.
The Supreme Court of the State affirmed the judgment
So held where the statute was applied in punishment of of conviction. 107 Neb. 657. It declared the offense
an instructor who taught reading in German, to a child charged and established was "the direct and intentional
of ten years, in a parochial school. teaching of the German language as a distinct subject to
a child who had not passed the eighth grade," in the
107 Neb. 657, reversed. parochial school maintained by Zion Evangelical
Lutheran Congregation, a collection of Biblical stories
being used therefor. And it held that the statute
ERROR to a judgment of the Supreme Court of Nebraska forbidding this did not conflict with the Fourteenth
affirming a conviction for infraction of a statute against Amendment, but was a valid exercise of the police
teaching of foreign languages to young children in power. The following excerpts from the opinion
schools. sufficiently indicate the reasons advanced to support
the conclusion.
Page 262 U. S. 396
"The salutary purpose of the statute is clear. The
MR. JUSTICE McREYNOLDS delivered the opinion of the legislature had seen the baneful effects of permitting
Court. foreigners,

Plaintiff in error was tried and convicted in the District Page 262 U. S. 398
Court for Hamilton County, Nebraska, under an
information which charged that, on May 25, 1920, while who had taken residence in this country, to rear and
an instructor in Zion Parochial School, he unlawfully educate their children in the language of their native
taught the subject of reading in the German language to land. The result of that condition was found to be
Raymond Parpart, a child of ten years, who had not inimical to our own safety. To allow the children of
attained foreigners, who had emigrated here, to be taught from
early childhood the language of the country of their
Page 262 U. S. 397 parents was to rear them with that language as their
mother tongue. It was to educate them so that they
and successfully passed the eighth grade. The must always think in that language, and, as a
information is based upon "An act relating to the consequence, naturally inculcate in them the ideas and
teaching of foreign languages in the State of Nebraska," sentiments foreign to the best interests of this country.
approved April 9, 1919, which follows [Laws 1919, c. The statute, therefore, was intended not only to require
249.]: that the education of all children be conducted in the
English language, but that, until they had grown into
that language and until it had become a part of them,
"Section 1. No person, individually or as a teacher, shall, they should not in the schools be taught any other
in any private, denominational, parochial or public language. The obvious purpose of this statute was that
the English language should be and become the mother
tongue of all children reared in this state. The U. S. 590; New York Life Ins. Co. v. Dodge, 246 U. S.
enactment of such a statute comes reasonably within 357; Truax v. Corrigan, 257 U. S. 312; Adkins v.
the police power of the state. Pohl v. State, 132 N.E. Children's Hospital, 261 U. S. 525; Wyeth v. Cambridge
(Ohio) 20; State v. Bartels, 181 N.W. (Ia.) 508." Board of Health, 200 Mass. 474. The established
doctrine is that this liberty may not be interfered
"It is suggested that the law is an unwarranted
restriction, in that it applies to all citizens of the state Page 262 U. S. 400
and arbitrarily interferes with the rights of citizens who
are not of foreign ancestry, and prevents them, without with, under the guise of protecting the public interest,
reason, from having their children taught foreign by legislative action which is arbitrary or without
languages in school. That argument is not well taken, for reasonable relation to some purpose within the
it assumes that every citizen finds himself restrained by competency of the State to effect. Determination by the
the statute. The hours which a child is able to devote to legislature of what constitutes proper exercise of police
study in the confinement of school are limited. It must power is not final or conclusive, but is subject to
have ample time for exercise or play. Its daily capacity supervision by the courts. Lawton v. Steele, 152 U. S.
for learning is comparatively small. A selection of 133, 152 U. S. 137.
subjects for its education, therefore, from among the
many that might be taught, is obviously necessary. The
legislature no doubt had in mind the practical operation The American people have always regarded education
of the law. The law affects few citizens, except those of and acquisition of knowledge as matters of supreme
foreign lineage. importance which should be diligently promoted. The
Ordinance of 1787 declares,
Page 262 U. S. 399
"Religion, morality, and knowledge being necessary to
good government and the happiness of mankind,
Other citizens, in their selection of studies, except schools and the means of education shall forever be
perhaps in rare instances, have never deemed it of encouraged."
importance to teach their children foreign languages
before such children have reached the eighth grade. In
the legislative mind, the salutary effect of the statute no Corresponding to the right of control, it is the natural
doubt outweighed the restriction upon the citizens duty of the parent to give his children education
generally, which, it appears, was a restriction of no real suitable to their station in life, and nearly all the States,
consequence." including Nebraska, enforce this obligation by
compulsory laws.
The problem for our determination is whether the
statute, as construed and applied, unreasonably Practically, education of the young is only possible in
infringes the liberty guaranteed to the plaintiff in error schools conducted by especially qualified persons who
by the Fourteenth Amendment. "No State shall . . . devote themselves thereto. The calling always has been
deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without regarded as useful and honorable, essential, indeed, to
due process of law." the public welfare. Mere knowledge of the German
language cannot reasonably be regarded as harmful.
Heretofore it has been commonly looked upon as
While this Court has not attempted to define with helpful and desirable. Plaintiff in error taught this
exactness the liberty thus guaranteed, the term has language in school as part of his occupation. His right
received much consideration and some of the included thus to teach and the right of parents to engage him so
things have been definitely stated. Without doubt, it to instruct their children, we think, are within the
denotes not merely freedom from bodily restraint, but liberty of the Amendment.
also the right of the individual to contract, to engage in
any of the common occupations of life, to acquire useful
knowledge, to marry, establish a home and bring up The challenged statute forbids the teaching in school of
children, to worship God according to the dictates of his any subject except in English; also the teaching of any
own conscience, and generally to enjoy those privileges other language until the pupil has attained and
long recognized at common law as essential to the successfully passed the eighth grade, which is not
orderly pursuit of happiness by free men. Slaughter- usually accomplished before the age of twelve. The
House Cases, 16 Wall. 36; Butchers' Union Co. v. Crescent Supreme Court of the State has held that "the so-called
City Co., 111 U. S. 746; Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U. S. ancient or dead languages" are not "within the spirit or
356; Minnesota v. Barber, 136 U. S. 313; Allgeyer v. the purpose of
Louisiana, 165 U. S. 578; Lochner v. New York, 198 U. S.
45; Twining v. New Jersey, 211 U. S. 78; Chicago, Page 262 U. S. 401
Burlington & Quincy R.R. Co. v. McGuire, 219 U. S.
549; Truax v. Raich, 239 U. S. 33; Adams v. Tanner, 244
the act." Nebraska District of Evangelical Lutheran Synod upon which our institutions rest, and it hardly will be
v. McKelvie, 187 N.W. 927. Latin, Greek, Hebrew are not affirmed that any legislature could impose such
proscribed; but German, French, Spanish, Italian and restrictions upon the people of a State without doing
every other alien speech are within the ban. Evidently violence to both letter and spirit of the Constitution.
the legislature has attempted materially to interfere
with the calling of modern language teachers, with the The desire of the legislature to foster a homogeneous
opportunities of pupils to acquire knowledge, and with people with American ideals prepared readily to
the power of parents to control the education of their understand current discussions of civic matters is easy
own. to appreciate. Unfortunate experiences during the late
war and aversion toward every characteristic of
It is said the purpose of the legislation was to promote truculent adversaries were certainly enough to quicken
civic development by inhibiting training and education that aspiration. But the means adopted, we think,
of the immature in foreign tongues and ideals before exceed the limitations upon the power of the State and
they could learn English and acquire American ideals, conflict with rights assured to plaintiff in error. The
and "that the English language should be and become interference is plain enough, and no adequate reason
the mother tongue of all children reared in this State." It therefor in time of peace and domestic tranquility has
is also affirmed that the foreign born population is very been shown.
large, that certain communities commonly use foreign
words, follow foreign leaders, move in a foreign The power of the State to compel attendance at some
atmosphere, and that the children are thereby hindered school and to make reasonable regulations for all
from becoming citizens of the most useful type, and the schools, including a requirement that they shall give
public safety is imperiled. instructions in English, is not questioned. Nor has
challenge been made of the State's power to prescribe a
That the State may do much, go very far, indeed, in curriculum for institutions which it supports. Those
order to improve the quality of its citizens, physically, matters are not within the present controversy. Our
mentally and morally, is clear; but the individual has concern is with the prohibition approved by the
certain fundamental rights which must be respected. Supreme Court. Adams v.
The protection of the Constitution extends to all, to
those who speak other languages as well as to those Page 262 U. S. 403
born with English on the tongue. Perhaps it would be
highly advantageous if all had ready understanding of
our ordinary speech, but this cannot be coerced by Tanner, supra, p. 244 U. S. 594, pointed out that mere abuse
incident to an occupation ordinarily useful is not enough to
methods which conflict with the Constitution -- a
justify its abolition, although regulation may be entirely
desirable end cannot be promoted by prohibited means.
proper. No emergency has arisen which renders knowledge
by a child of some language other than English so clearly
For the welfare of his Ideal Commonwealth, Plato harmful as to justify its inhibition with the consequent
suggested a law which should provide: infringement of rights long freely enjoyed. We are
constrained to conclude that the statute as applied is
arbitrary and without reasonable relation to any end
"That the wives of our guardians are to be common, and
within the competency of the State.
their children are to be common, and no parent is to
know his own child,
As the statute undertakes to interfere only with teaching
which involves a modern language, leaving complete
Page 262 U. S. 402 freedom as to other matters, there seems no adequate
foundation for the suggestion that the purpose was to
nor any child his parent. . . . The proper officers will take protect the child's health by limiting his mental activities. It
the offspring of the good parents to the pen or fold, and is well known that proficiency in a foreign language seldom
there they will deposit them with certain nurses who comes to one not instructed at an early age, and experience
dwell in a separate quarter; but the offspring of the shows that this is not injurious to the health, morals or
inferior, or of the better when they chance to be understanding of the ordinary child.
deformed, will be put away in some mysterious,
unknown place, as they should be." The judgment of the court below must be reversed, and the
cause remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent
with this opinion.
In order to submerge the individual. and develop ideal
citizens, Sparta assembled the males at seven into
barracks and intrusted their subsequent education and Reversed. [See the separate opinion of MR. JUSTICE
training to official guardians. Although such measures HOLMES, concurred in by MR. JUSTICE SUTHERLAND, in
the next case, at p. 262 U. S. 412, infra.]
have been deliberately approved by men of great
genius, their ideas touching the relation between
individual and State were wholly different from those