Some religious minorities choose to live apart from mainstream society. For example, the Old Order Amish live in cohesive communities where hard work and cooperation are virtues highly esteemed. The individualism so central to the modern American character finds no place among the Amish, where success is measured by how well one uses his or her talents to the benefit of the group. The Amish emphasize a "life of goodness" rather than a life of intellect. They shun modern technology, seeking the wisdom of the ages through hard work, unassisted by modern conveniences such as automobiles, tractors, or electricity.
The Amish raised no objection to a Wisconsin State law requiring that all children attend elementary schools. They believed that a basic education in the three R's was useful—it would help children learn to read the Bible, teach values of citizenship, and also familiarize the children with the "outside world." State requirements setting the age limit for compulsory attendance at 16, however, met with Amish resistance.
Jonas Yoder and Wallace Miller were members of the Old Order Amish church. Adin Yutzy was a member of the Conservative Amish Mennonites. All lived in Green County, Wisconsin. Their children Frieda Yoder (15), Barbara Miller (15), and Vernon Yutzy (14) had all graduated from a public elementary school in the Amish community. The Amish refused to comply with a State law requiring that their children attend school until age 16, which would have entailed sending their children to a public high school some miles away from the Amish community. The children did not attend any alternative school, but worked actively in the Amish community. When Wisconsin brought the parents to court in 1971 for failure to send the children to school, the parents were fined. On appeal, the Wisconsin State Supreme Court found in the parents' favor, overturning the fines. Wisconsin school officials then appealed that decision to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The "Amish case" centered on the 1st and 14th amendments, specifically on the incorporation of the Free Exercise Clause into State constitutions. Can a State law, enacted for the benefit and protection of children, override the deeply held religious beliefs of a traditional community? Does the Free Exercise Clause of the 1st Amendment—as applied to the States by the 14th Amendment—provide the Amish protection against a compulsory attendance law that subjects their children to influences they consider harmful?
For Wisconsin: As Thomas Jefferson pointed out, some degree of education is necessary to prepare citizens to participate effectively and intelligently in our open political system. To accept the Amish position is to accept ignorance. It is the State's duty to protect children from ignorance. Additional years of compulsory high school education would aid any Amish child who chose to leave the community and enter the larger world.
For Yoder: If the Old Order Amish sent their children to the public school, "they would not only expose themselves to the danger of the censure of the church community, but…endanger their own salvation and that of their children." Forcing them to do so would clearly violate their free exercise rights. The Wisconsin Supreme Court ruling should be allowed to stand.
Only Justice Douglas, dissenting in part, voted against the 6–1 majority opinion written by Chief Justice Burger. The Court held "with the Supreme Court of Wisconsin, that the First and Fourteenth Amendments prevent the State from compelling [the Amish] to cause their children to attend formal high school to age 16." Burger's opinion stressed the broader protection of the 1st Amendment, noting: "[I]t cannot be overemphasized that we are not dealing with a way of life and mode of education by a group claiming to have recently discovered some 'progressive' or more enlightened process for rearing children for modern life." The Amish were, instead, a people living in self-imposed isolation, seeking a simplicity of life which they believed helped them to achieve a closeness to God that the pace and the distractions of modern life had rendered impossible, in their view.
In view of the kind of life for which the Amish children were being trained and the unquestioned success of the Amish society, the State of Wisconsin did not have a sufficiently compelling interest in the additional years of schooling to warrant interfering with the free exercise of their religion. "The impact of the compulsory attendance law on (the Amish) practice of…religion is not only severe, but inescapable, for the Wisconsin law…compels them, under threat of criminal sanction, to perform actions undeniably at odds with the fundamental tenets of their religious beliefs," Burger wrote. "A way of life that is odd or even erratic but interferes with no rights or interests of others is not to be condemned because it is different."
"This case involves the fundamental interest of parents, as contrasted with that of the State, to guide the religious future and education of their children," Burger wrote. Western "history and culture," he wrote, "reflect a strong tradition of parental concern for the nurture and upbringing of their children" which the State should not ignore.
Justice Douglas dissented because he feared that the children of the Amish would suffer. "If [a child] is harnessed to the Amish way of life by those in authority over him, and if his education is truncated [cut off], his entire life may be stunted and deformed. The child, therefore, should be given an opportunity to be heard before the State gives the exemption honored today."