Widmar v. Vincent

454 U.S. 263 (1981)

From our private database of 47,500+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Widmar v. Vincent

United States Supreme Court
454 U.S. 263 (1981)

  • Written by Abby Roughton, JD
Play video

Facts

The University of Missouri at Kansas City (UMKC), a public university, recognized over 100 student groups. UMKC regularly allowed student groups to use university facilities for meetings, in accordance with UMKC’s stated policy of encouraging the activities of student organizations. Cornerstone was a religious student group at UMKC. In 1977, UMKC told Cornerstone that it could not meet in the university’s facilities because a university regulation prohibited the use of university facilities for religious worship or religious teaching. Clark Vincent and other Cornerstone members (plaintiffs) brought an action in federal court against UMKC Dean of Students Gary Widmar and the University’s Board of Curators (defendants), challenging the regulation. The district court upheld the regulation, but the appellate court reversed. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Powell, J.)

Concurrence (Stevens, J.)

Dissent (White, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 966,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 966,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,500 briefs, keyed to 1,007 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
  • AI-generated podcast version of every brief — listen on the go, between classes, or whenever reading isn’t an option. New

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 966,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 47,500 briefs - keyed to 1,007 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership

Casebooks

Constitutional Law

Education Law

First Amendment

Religion

Key Terms

  • Establishment ClauseThe provision of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution that prohibits the government from making laws that establish or favor a religion, or no religion.
  • Lemon TestFrom Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 (1971), a test to determine the constitutionality of a law under the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, which requires legislation concerning religion to have a secular legislative purpose, not have the primary effect of advancing or inhibiting religion, and not result in excessive government entanglement with religion. The Supreme Court modified the Lemon test in Agostini v. Felton, 521 U.S. 203 (1997), and overruled the Lemon test in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, 597 U.S. 507 (2022).

Understand your casebook readings in seconds

Use our case briefs to comprehend your casebook readings faster, supplement your notes and outlines, and outshine your peers in class.

Get instant access to over 47,500+ expert-written case briefs in a searchable database keyed to 1,007 law school casebooks.

Case book preview
Start your free 7-day trial