The appellate court was convinced that just having a prayer at the beginning of the day was not an establishment of a national religion, but just an acknowledgement of our religious heritage.

Hey, well, you know, you're just doing what you want to do.

As soon as you're breaking with the larger cultural tradition and your group tradition, you're screwed.

So today, Janessa, we have to discuss the case for which the Stanford Law Review wrote,

provoked more outrage than Dred Scott of East Sanford. It infuriated more areas of the country than Brown v. Board of Education. It inspired more congressional attempts to nullify it and impassioned vows to evade than Roe v. Wade, and it was intensely unpopular with the American public. The Supreme Court received more mail on this case than it ever received on a single case, around 5,000 letters,

mostly negative in the first month after the decision. In a gallop poll taken shortly after the decision,

registered disapproval of the ruling at 79%. This, of course, is the one Supreme Court case that

has contributed more than any to the moral decline of our nation, as I'm sure you're now.

There is nothing that has more contributed to the moral decline of our nation, as I'm sure you're now. There is nothing that has more contributed to the moral decline than the complete absence.

And I mean absence, I mean, it's no longer something that can be done of prayer in schools.

Here we are.

Yes, as we all know, if anyone were to try to on their free time in a school, start praying. You get in big trouble.

That's totally what that decision means.

If you're bowing your head in class, you better be sleeping, buddy.

That's right.

I mean, I see you praying to some higher power.

Oh, geez.

This is, of course, Engel v. V. V. V.

1963, another beautiful golden age, jeez. This is, of course, Engel v. V. V. V. V. 1963, another beautiful golden age, war in court and liberal decision eliminating public prayer in schools, or maybe not. We'll find out. We'll find out what it actually does.

Really interesting stuff, because I knew something about the establishment clause.

I had a lot of fun reading up on this and researching and thinking about how we got here. We're going to mostly focus on Engel of Viva Talley itself today. There is a long line of cases afterwards, as I'm sure you know, and a big muddle that came after and trying to understand the establishment clause. But this is one of the great Establishment Clause rulings. So I'm excited to get into it. And we'll talk a little bit about the science also behind coercion and making people feel like they have to participate

in religion. So come on back and talk about all of that. So a quick prayer break. See you in a minute.

...