Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Debating Yoga and Mindfulness in Public SchoolsReforming Secular Education or Reestablishing Religion?$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Candy Gunther Brown

Print publication date: 2019

Print ISBN-13: 9781469648484

Published to North Carolina Scholarship Online: May 2020

DOI: 10.5149/northcarolina/9781469648484.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA PRESS SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.northcarolina.universitypressscholarship.com). (c) Copyright University of North Carolina Press, 2021. All Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in NCSO for personal use.date: 23 September 2021

Sedlock v. Baird

Sedlock v. Baird

Chapter:
(p.113) Chapter 6 Sedlock v. Baird
Source:
Debating Yoga and Mindfulness in Public Schools
Author(s):

Candy Gunther Brown

Publisher:
University of North Carolina Press
DOI:10.5149/northcarolina/9781469648484.003.0007

Chapter 6 interrogates Sedlock v. Baird (2013; 2015), the highest profile state court ruling on public-school yoga. California Superior Court Judge John Meyer found that yoga is “religious” and Ashtanga yoga is the “cornerstone” of “EUSD yoga,” but because a reasonable child would not perceive EUSD yoga as endorsing or disfavoring religion, the program is constitutional. Meyer’s primary example of how EUSD removed “religious, mystical, or spiritual trappings” is that EUSD relabeled Lotus as “criss-cross applesauce” (though it did not). An appellate court found that Hinduism is a “religion” and expressed “little doubt” that public-school Ashtanga yoga is unconstitutional—but determined that EUSD yoga is not Ashtanga yoga because EUSD subtracted Sanskrit and cultural references. This chapter explains how, for financial, conceptual, and procedural reasons, evidence crucial to understanding EUSD yoga was deemed irrelevant, lacking credibility, or inadmissible. Sedlock turned legal precedent on its head—concluding that schools may encourage children to perform religious practices if schools do not teach about the history and context of religious beliefs. The chapter argues that Sedlock illustrates how legal precedent built upon an incomplete documentary record and narrowly doctrinal understanding of religion may, ironically, make religious practice more acceptable in the public square.

Keywords:   Sedlock v. Baird (2013; 2015), Ashtanga yoga, EUSD yoga, reasonable child, relabeled, Sanskrit, legal precedent, religious practices, history and context, religious beliefs

North Carolina Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .