Unconstitutional Conditions upon the Provision of a State Benefit:

The N.H. Supreme Court claims that a child has a fundamental right to an adequate education. Claremont I, 138 N.H. 192 However, it may not condition the provision of this education - whether it be a right or a privilege - upon the sacrifice by parents of their First Amendment rights under the US Constitution.

Is not this precisely the effect of a school system that requires a child to attend a school controlled by the majority in order to receive a free and adequate education? The public school inculcates values of the majority that may be abhorrent to the basic beliefs and way of life of families in the minority. The purpose of a constitution is to protect the rights of the minority from the majority. Yet, families, particularly poor families who have limited financial means, must decide whether to abandon their beliefs in order to gain the benefit of a State-guaranteed education, or to abandon the State benefit in order to preserve the family belief structure from State interference.

Conditioning the provision of a State benefits upon the sacrifice of fundamental rights has been held unconstitutional. In Sherbert v. Verner 374 U.S. 398 (1963) the U.S. Court held that "conditions upon public benefits cannot be sustained if they so operate, whatever their purpose, as to inhibit or deter the exercise of First Amendment freedoms."

New Hampshire Politics

P.O. Box 1120 Merrimack, NH 03054