Ariel Cipoletta

March 5, 2010

AP Government

Berry

Meyer v. Nebraska (1923)

The early nineteen twenties marked the height of the American dream.  The population, in particular the middle class, made their dreams of a house with a white picket fence, a reality.  The economy was flourishing as a direct result of the stock market boom.  The resent economic upturn created national stability and most people’s trust in the United States governing in terms of finical stability; however, World War Two had just concluded which made some people skeptical of foreigners.  The sense of nationalism was also at a high. The nation possessed gilded age Supreme Court justices.  In the year 1923 the court was head by Chief Justice, William Howard Taft.

            On May 25, 1920 Robert T. Meyer, an instructor (teacher) at Zion Parochial School taught Raymond Parpart, a ten year old boy, how to read in the language of German.  This violated a State of Nebraska law that had been on the books since April 9, 1919.  This law stated, “

"Section 1. No person, individually or as a teacher, shall, in any private, denominational, parochial or public school, teach any subject to any person in any language than the English language.

Sec. 2. Languages, other than the English language, may be taught as languages only after a pupil shall have attained and successfully passed the eighth grade as evidenced by a certificate of graduation issued by the county superintendent of the county in which the child resides.

Sec. 3. Any person who violates any of the provisions of this act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction, shall be subject to a fine of not less than twenty-five dollars ($25), nor more than one hundred dollars ($100), or be confined in the county jail for any period not exceeding thirty days for each offense.

Sec. 4. Whereas, an emergency exists, this act shall be in force from and after its passage and approval.”[i]

Meyer had unlawfully instructed a student, in a language other than English (German), who had not yet, “attained and successfully passed the eighth grade.”[ii] Since this law was on was in effect, and the events took place in the State of Nebraska the plaintiff, Meyer was tried and then convicted in Hamilton County, Nebraska’s district court. 

            Meyer appealed the decision of the district court of Hamilton County, Nebraska to the supreme court.  The question at hand being, “Does the Nebraska statute violate the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process clause?”[iii]   The Due Process clause in the Fourteenth Amendment in question states, “No state…shall deprive any person of life liberty or property without due process of law.”[iv]  This was an argument never before presented to the Supreme Court.  

The case identified the justification upon creating the legislation.  The State of Nebraska created this piece of legislation because the lawmakers of Nebraska had witnessed, “baneful effects of permitting foreigners, who had taken residence in this country, to rear and educate their children in the language of their native land. The result of that condition was found to be inimical to our own safety.”[v]  The state felt it was safer to restrict any teaching to foreigners children by not allowing the learning of any langue other than English until such time (after the completion of eighth grade) that, “it became a part of them.”[vi]  This is part of the argument that the Supreme court of Nebraska vocalized to conclude the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment unbroken and concluded it was rather “a valid exercise in police power.”  

An additional aspect of this law that the plaintiff’s side used in the argument was that the legislation excluded the teachings of Latin, Greek, and Hebrew because they are, “the so-called ancient or dead languages'” and therefore “are not 'within the spirit or the purpose of the act.”  However, “German, French, Spanish, Italian, and every other alien speech are within the ban.”[vii]

It could not be concluded that the knowledge of German couldn’t be considered harmful.  The Court also vocalized, “It is suggested that the law is an unwarranted restriction, in that it applies to all citizens of the state and arbitrarily interferes with the rights of citizens who are not of foreign ancestry, and prevents them, without reason, from having their children taught foreign languages in school. That argument is not well taken, for it assumes that every citizen finds himself restrained by the statute.”[viii]

The Supreme court identified that they had not attempted to clarify the precise independences guarantee in the word “liberty” stated in the Fourteenth amendment but did take several into account.  These several rights defined in the meaning included, “it denotes not merely freedom from bodily restraint but 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 children, to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience, and generally to enjoy those privileges long recognized at common law as essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.”8  In implying the meaning of the “liberty” included in the Fourteenth amendment the Supreme Court pronounced the ability of the lawmakers of Nebraska to decide, “what constitutes proper exercise of police power is not final or conclusive but is subject to supervision by the courts...“ It was decided that proper state objectives were not related to state regulations of liberty in an adequate manor.  For these reasons the Supreme Court ruled the law unconstitutional and stated, “The judgment of the court belo must be reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.”[ix]  In conclusion the law was reversed.

            This Supreme Court decisions was immensely important, for it set the precedent for foreign languages taught in a school setting.  This determination also created a foundation for foreign language controversy and requirements in years to follow.

            This decision was well justified by the way the Due Process clause of the Fourteen amendments articulates.  Also specifically by the way the supreme court interpreted by the word “liberty”.  This argument and law created and enforced by the state of Nebraska also has little justification when you acknowledge the United States of America is inhabited by immigrants or ancestors who were immigrants.