...or primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion; finally, the statute must not foster "an excessive government entanglement with religion." Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 US 602, 612-613 (1971), quoting Walz v. Tax Commission, 397 US 664, 674 (1970) (citations omitted). Petitioner...

...primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion . . . ; finally, the statute must not foster 'an excessive government entanglement with religion.' " Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 US, at 612-613. With full recognition that these are no more than helpful signposts, we consider the present...

...primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion . . ., finally, the statute must not foster 'an excessive government entanglement with religion.' " — Lemon v. Kurtzman 403 US 602 at 612 (1971). It is not the purpose of this testimony to review Supreme Court decisions in the church...

...primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion, . . . ; finally, the statute must not foster 'an excessive government entanglement with religion.' " Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 US 602 (1971) at 612-613. HR 81 and similar bills surely have a secular legislative purpose. However, when...

...primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion, ... ; finally, the statute must not foster 'an excessive government entanglement with religion.' " Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 US 602 (1971) at 612-613. HR 81 and similar bills surely have a secular legislative purpose. However, when...

...primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion, . . . ; finally, the statute must not foster 'an excessive government entanglement with religion.'" Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 US 602 (1971) at 612-613. S. 1782 and similar bills surely have a secular legislative purpose. However, when...

...primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion . . . ; finally the statute must not foster 'an excessive government entanglement with religion.' " Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 US 602, 612-613 (1971) (citations omitted). If a statute violates any of these three principles, it must be...

...or primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion; third, the statute must not foster an excessive government entanglement with...religion. Lemon v. Kurtzman. 403 US 602, 612-13 (1971). S.2250 fails to satisfy any of these requirements. The bill has no secular legislative purpose, but...

...primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion . . . ; finally, the statute must not foster "an excessive government entanglement with religion.'" Lemon v. Kurtzman, [403 US 602, 612-613 (1971)]. To withstand attack under the establishment clause, the challenged state action 481...

...or primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion; third, the statute must not foster an excessive government entanglement with religion. Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 US 602, 612-l3 (l97l). S.2250 fails to satisfy any of these requirements. The bill has no secular legislative...