NotesFAQContact Us
Search Tips
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
ERIC Number: EJ897912
Record Type: Journal
Publication Date: 2010
Pages: 9
Abstractor: As Provided
Reference Count: 8
ISSN: ISSN-1558-2159
A Ghoulish Inconsistency: A Comment on Tim Keller's "The National Implications of "Cain v. Horne""
Schoenig, John
Journal of School Choice, v4 n3 p336-344 2010
Tim Keller's article insightfully explores the flawed legal reasoning behind and potentially pernicious consequences of the Arizona Supreme Court's 2009 "Cain vs. Horne" ruling. He carefully examines the two fundamental flaws in the court's interpretative methodology: a failure to engage in a straightforward textual analysis of Arizona's Blaine Amendment and an unwillingness to adhere to the analytic framework that the court itself had previously established. In addition, Keller discusses the implications of the Cain decision, demonstrating why it is not persuasive legal authority for similarly situated constitutional provisions in other states. This brief comment notes that Keller's analysis identifies the fundamental misapprehension that underpins Cain: an unwillingness on the part of many courts to accept their Blaine Amendments at face value and a lack of clarity about the difference between direct and indirect aid. (Contains 7 notes.)
Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 325 Chestnut Street Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Fax: 215-625-2940; Web site:
Publication Type: Journal Articles; Opinion Papers
Education Level: Elementary Secondary Education
Audience: N/A
Language: English
Sponsor: N/A
Authoring Institution: N/A
Identifiers - Location: Arizona
Identifiers - Laws, Policies, & Programs: Establishment Clause; Lemon v Kurtzman