The Future of the Lemon Test: A Sweeter Alternative for Establishment Clause Analysis

Authors

Marcia S. Alembik, University of Georgia School of Law

Publication Date

2006

Abstract

For over three decades the Supreme Court has applied the three-pronged Lemon test to determine whether state actions violate the Establishment Clause. While the Lemon test remains the most widely accepted test for Establishment Clause analysis,the recent Supreme Court decisions of Van Orden v. Perry and McCreary County v. ACLU of Kentucky have highlighted the Court's ongoing unrest with its application. Although attempts at total replacement of the test have thus far proved unsuccessful, modifications and alternatives to the test and its individual prongs are continually introduced and applied. The Court's lack of a consistent, definite test for Establishment Clause jurisprudence has resulted in unpredictability and confusion in the circuit courts. Until the Court expressly reinstates or rejects the Lemon test analysis of the Establishment Clause, or some alternative form of that analysis, there will not be consistency within the federal courts. This Note argues against complete rejection of the Lemon test and suggests accepting the modified version presented in the case of Agostini v. Felton.

Recommended Citation

Alembik, Marcia S. (2006) "The Future of the Lemon Test: A Sweeter Alternative for Establishment Clause Analysis," Georgia Law Review: Vol. 40: No. 4, Article 9.
Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.uga.edu/glr/vol40/iss4/9