School District of the City of Grand Rapids v. Ball (No. 83-990) 718 F.2d 1389, affirmed.
Syllabus	Opinion [ Brennan ]	Concurrence [ Burger ]	Concurrence [ O'Connor ]	Dissent [ White ]	Dissent [ Rehnquist ]
HTML version PDF version	HTML version PDF version	HTML version PDF version	HTML version PDF version	HTML version PDF version	HTML version PDF version

BURGER, C.J., Concurring Opinion

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

---

473 U.S. 373

School District of the City of Grand Rapids v. Ball

CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

---

No. 83-990 Argued: December 5, 1984 --- Decided: July 1, 1985

---

CHIEF JUSTICE BURGER, concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part.

I agree with the Court that, under our decisions in Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 (1971), and Earley v. DiCenso, decided together with Lemon, the Grand Rapids Community Education program violates the Establishment Clause. As to the Shared Time program, I dissent for the reasons stated in my dissenting opinion in Aguilar v. Felton, post, p. 402.