Could a South Carolina school district release students from regular classes for religious instruction in 1995?

Official title

Concerning the legality of parents’ releasing their children for religious instructions during study halls, and elective and exploratory class time.

Requester

The Honorable Joe Wilson, Senator, Lexington County

Plain-English summary

A senator asked whether parents could have students released for religious instruction during normal classes, in addition to study halls and elective periods. The 1995 informal opinion said existing authority appeared to permit a district to adopt that policy when the student continued to meet state education requirements and the release did not interfere with regular coursework.

The letter did not require districts to offer released time. It said a district choosing to adopt a policy would determine how long students could be released and what procedures would govern. It built on two earlier AG letters and cited a U.S. Supreme Court decision and a State Board of Education regulation.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1995. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Could a district permit release during a normal class period? A: The letter said it appeared to have that authority under the described conditions: education requirements had to be met and regular coursework could not be disrupted.

Q: Did the AG require every district to offer released time? A: No. The letter described a policy a district could choose to adopt.

Q: Who set the release schedule and procedures? A: The opinion left the extent of release and the procedures to the district if it adopted a policy.

Background and statutory framework

The request followed earlier informal opinions about release during study halls and elective or exploratory classes. The letter relied on Zorach v. Clauson and State Board of Education regulation 43-274 as apparent authority for a district policy.

Citations and references

• Zorach v. Clauson
• State Board of Education regulation 43-274, as identified in the letter

Source

• Landing page: https://www.scag.gov/opinions/opinions-archive/september-5-1995-1/
• Original PDF: https://www.scag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/1995sept5wilson.pdf

Original opinion text

{

r

The State of South Carolina

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
CHARLES MOLONY CONDON
AITORNEY GENERAL

September 5, 1995

i
I
I

I

r
I

The Honorable Joe Wilson
Senator, Lexington County
P.O. Box 142
Columbia, South Carolina 29202
Dear Senator Wilson:
You have requested additional information regarding the informal opinions dated August 17 and 29, 1995 concerning the legality of parents' releasing their children for religious instructions during study halls, and elective and exploratory class time. As noted in the earlier letters, Zorach v. Clauson, 343 U.S. 306, 72 S.Ct. 679, 96 L.Ed. 954 (1952) and State Board of Education regulation 43-274 (S.C. Code Ann., Vol. 24), as to the authority of local boards of trustees to excuse absences appear to permit a school district to adopt a policy of excusing a student from school for purposes of religious instruction. See also ~ Atty. Gen. (February 16, 1983); ~also Ops. Atty. Gen. {June 17, 1986). Specifically you would like to know whether a school district has the authority to allow a student to be released for religious instruction during " ... normal school classes ... so long as such student is meeting all State law education requirements, and so long as· attendance at such released time program does not interfere with such student's attendance at classes conducted as part of his regular course work." In response to your question, I note that the above authority appears to allow a District to adopt a policy permitting released time under, at least, these circumstances; however, as noted earlier the extent of time for the release and the procedures for obtaining the release would be a matter for the District to determine under the above authority if the District chose to adopt such a policy. I hope that this additional information will be of assistance to you. This letter is an informal opinion. It has been written by the designated Assistant Deputy Attorney General and represents the opinion of the undersigned attorney as to the specific

RF\IBERT

c. DI:'. "''s Bl ILDl'.\G

•

POST OFFICE Box 11549

•

COLl'\fBIA. S.C. 29211-1549

•

TELEPHONE:

803-734-3970

•

F.~CSl\llLE: 803-253-6283

The Honorable Joe Wilson, Senator
September 5, 1995
:Page 2
questions asked. It has not, however, been personally reviewed by the Attorney General nor officially published in the manner of a formal opinion. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have additional questions. Yours very truly,

l
I

I
b
I
.

r·
!

c-·;77 -,

• .]

_..

.- , J ~. ~Q"r-y-· Smifh, Jr.

Assistant Deputy Attorney General
JESJr.