Cilt 14 Sayı 99 (2026)
2026/2

Araştırma Makalesi

Yüksek Mahkeme Kararlarına Göre ABD’de Din-Devlet İlişkileri

Yayımlandı 31.08.2026

  • Nesrin Ünlü Marmara Üniversitesi
Cilt 14 Sayı 99 kapak

Öz

Bu makale, Amerika Birleşik Devletleri’nde din–devlet ilişkilerinin temelini oluşturan resmî din benimsememe ilkesinin tarihsel gelişimini ve bu ilkenin Yüksek Mahkeme içtihatları yoluyla zaman içinde nasıl yorumlandığını incelemektedir. Amerikan toplumunda özellikle II. Dünya Savaşı’ndan sonra devletin din ile ilişkili tutumlarını büyük ölçüde Yüksek Mahkeme kararları belirlemiştir. Çalışmanın temel problemi, Ek Madde 1’de yer alan resmî din benimsememe hükmünün farklı dönemlerde hangi yorumlara tabi tutulduğu ve bu yorumların uygulamada ne tür sonuçlar doğurduğudur. Bu kapsamda makale, dinî gruplara kamu yardımları, devlet okullarında dua ve dinî içerikler, kamu alanlarındaki dinî semboller, meclis açılış duaları ve manevi danışmanlık hizmetleri gibi başlıca tartışma alanlarında mahkemenin yaklaşımının nasıl evrildiğini ortaya koymayı hedeflemektedir. Makalede ele alınan kararlar, Yüksek Mahkeme'nin 1947’deki Everson kararından 1970’lerin sonuna kadar daha katı bir din-devlet ayrımı tutumu benimsediğini; ancak 1980’lerden itibaren dinî kurumlara yönelik kamu desteklerini daha geniş yorumlayan, giderek daha uyumcu bir çizgiye yöneldiğini göstermektedir. Özellikle mahkemenin 2000’li yıllarda verdiği bazı kararlar dine kamusal alanda bazı avantajlar sağlamıştır. Genel hatlarıyla, resmî din benimsememe ilkesinin yorumu, dinamikliğini korumaya devam etmekte; ideolojik değişimler, yargı felsefeleri ve kamusal hayatta din üzerine yürütülen daha geniş çaplı siyasal ve kültürel tartışmalar tarafından şekillenmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler Din-Devlet Ayrımı, Amerika Birleşik Devletleri Yüksek Mahkemesi, Sosyal Değişim, Din Özgürlüğü, Kamusal Alan ve Din

Abstract

Religion–State Relations in the United States According to Supreme Court Decisions

This article examines the historical development of the non-establishment principle, which forms the foundation of church–state relations in the United States, and analyzes how this principle has been interpreted through the U.S. Supreme Court jurisprudence. The central problem of the study concerns the varying interpretations applied to the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment across different historical periods, as well as the practical consequences that have resulted from these interpretations. Within this framework, the article aims to reveal how the Court’s approach has evolved in major areas of controversy, including public funding for religious groups, prayer and religious content in public schools, religious symbols in public spaces, legislative prayer, and chaplaincy services. The rulings examined in the article show that the Supreme Court adopted a stricter separationist stance from the Everson decision of 1947 to the end of the 1970s, but from the 1980s onward gradually shifted toward a more accommodationist position that interpreted public support for religious institutions more broadly. Notably, several decisions issued in the 2000s extended certain advantages to religion in the public sphere. Overall, the interpretation of the non-establishment principle remains dynamic, shaped by ideological shifts, judicial philosophies, and broader political and cultural debates concerning religion’s place in public life.

Keywords Separation of Church and State, Supreme Court of the United States, Social Change, Freedom of Religion, Public Sphere and Religion

PDF

Kaynakça

  1. Abington School District v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203 (1963).
  2. Agostini v. Felton, 521 U.S. 203 (1997).
  3. Aguilar v. Felton, 473 U.S. 402 (1985).
  4. Akkır, R. (2018). Modern zamanlarda ulus-devlet ve din-devlet ilişkilerinin Batı dünyası çerçevesinde değerlendirilmesi. Siirt Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 5(1), 97–121.
  5. American Legion v. American Humanist Association, 588 U.S. 29 (2019).
  6. Barclay, S. H. (2022). The religion clauses after Kennedy v. Bremerton School District. Iowa Law Review, 108, 2097–2145.
  7. Batchis, W. (2024). The discriminatory religion clauses. Southern California Law Review, 97, 367–412.
  8. Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District v. Grumet, 512 U.S. 687 (1994).
  9. Board of Education v. Allen, 392 U.S. 236 (1968).
  10. Capitol Square Review and Advisory Board v. Pinette, 515 U.S. 753 (1995).
  11. Carson v. Makin, 596 U.S. 767 (2022).
  12. Committee for Public Education and Religious Liberty v. Nyquist, 413 U.S. 756 (1973).
  13. County of Allegheny v. ACLU, 492 U.S. 573 (1989).
  14. Crisafulli, S. J. (2003). Zelman v. Simmons-Harris: Is the Supreme Court’s latest word on school voucher programs really the last word? Fordham Law Review, 71(1), 2227–2281.
  15. Crooker, V. C. (2005). Zelman v. Simmons-Harris: The Establishment Clause and the fight for school vouchers. Arkansas Law Review, 58(1), 395–424.
  16. Dahl, R. A. (1957). Decision-making in a democracy: The Supreme Court as a national policy-maker. Journal of Public Law, 6(1), 279–295.
  17. Douglas, B. (2023). Shurtleff v. City of Boston, Massachusetts: A lost opportunity to address the government speech doctrine. Denver Law Review Forum, 100(1), 1–29.
  18. Edwards v. Aguillard, 482 U.S. 578 (1987).
  19. Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow, 542 U.S. 1 (2004).
  20. Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421 (1962).
  21. Epperson v. Arkansas, 393 U.S. 97 (1968).
  22. Esbeck, C. H. (2004). Dissent and disestablishment: The church-state settlement in the early American Republic. Brigham Young University Law Review, 2004(4), 1385–1491.
  23. Esbeck, C. H. (2007). The 60th anniversary of the Everson decision and America’s church-state proposition. Journal of Law and Religion, 23(1), 15–41. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0748081400002587 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0748081400002587
  24. Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue, 591 U.S. 464 (2020).
  25. Everson v. Board of Education of the Township of Ewing, 330 U.S. 1 (1947).
  26. Greenawalt, K. (2005a). Does God belong in public schools? Princeton University Press.
  27. Greenawalt, K. (2005b). History as ideology: Philip Hamburger’s Separation of Church and State. California Law Review, 93, 367–386.
  28. Greenawalt, K. (2008). Religion and the Constitution: Vol. 2. Establishment and fairness. Princeton University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400828234
  29. Gunn, T. J. (2004). Religious freedom and laïcité: A comparison of the United States and France. Brigham Young University Law Review, 2004(2), 419–506.
  30. Hamburger, P. (2002). Separation of church and state. Harvard University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674038189
  31. Huhn, W. (2015). Tradition, policy, and the Establishment Clause: Justice Kennedy’s opinion in Town of Greece v. Galloway. Akron Journal of Constitutional Law and Policy, 6, 11–26.
  32. Jones, R. H. (1986). Accommodationist and separationist ideals in Supreme Court Establishment Clause decisions. Journal of Church and State, 28(2), 193–223. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcs/28.2.193 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jcs/28.2.193
  33. Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, 597 U.S. 507 (2022).
  34. Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 400 F. Supp. 2d 707 (M.D. Pa. 2005).
  35. Koştaş, M. (1988). Amerika Birleşik Devletlerinde laiklik. Ankara Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 30(1–4), 245–264. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1501/Ilhfak_0000000727
  36. Kowalski, M. ve Becker, W. S. (2015). A developing profession: Muslim chaplains in American public life. Contemporary Islam, 9(1), 17–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11562-014-0308-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11562-014-0308-9
  37. Kritzer, H. M. ve Richards, M. J. (2003). Jurisprudential regimes and Supreme Court decisionmaking: The Lemon regime and the Establishment Clause cases. Law & Society Review, 37(4), 827–840. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0023-9216.2003.03704005.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0023-9216.2003.03704005.x
  38. Lamb’s Chapel v. Center Moriches Union Free School District, 508 U.S. 384 (1993).
  39. Lee v. Weisman, 505 U.S. 577 (1992).
  40. Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 (1971).
  41. Levy, L. W. (2017). The Establishment Clause: Religion and the First Amendment. University of North Carolina Press.
  42. Linder, D. O. (2007). State v. John Scopes (The Monkey Trial). 25 Eylül 2025 tarihinde erişildi. https://irlaw.umkc.edu/faculty_works/842 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1024297
  43. Locke v. Davey, 540 U.S. 712 (2004).
  44. Long, I. J. ve Ansari, B. (2018). Islamic pastoral care and the development of Muslim chaplaincy. Journal of Muslim Mental Health, 12(1), 109–121. https://doi.org/10.3998/jmmh.10381607.0012.105 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3998/jmmh.10381607.0012.105
  45. Lund, C. (2010). Salazar v. Buono and the future of the Establishment Clause. Northwestern University Law Review, 105, 60–71.
  46. Lynch v. Donnelly, 465 U.S. 668 (1984). DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2408697
  47. Mallory, J. G. (2006). ‘An officer of the house which chooses him, and nothing more’: How should Marsh v. Chambers apply to rotating chaplains? University of Chicago Law Review, 73(4), 1421–1453.
  48. Marietta, M. (2014). A citizen’s guide to the Constitution and the Supreme Court: Constitutional conflict in American politics. Routledge.
  49. Marsh v. Chambers, 463 U.S. 783 (1983).
  50. McCollum v. Board of Education, 333 U.S. 203 (1948).
  51. McCreary County v. ACLU of Kentucky, 545 U.S. 844 (2005).
  52. Meek v. Pittenger, 421 U.S. 349 (1975).
  53. Mitchell v. Helms, 530 U.S. 793 (2000). DOI: https://doi.org/10.2514/2.1059
  54. Morrison, M. J. (2006). The Van Orden and McCreary County cases: Closing the gaps remaining between the established lines of Ten Commandments jurisprudence. Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice, 13, 435–476.
  55. Mueller v. Allen, 463 U.S. 388 (1983). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1049/ep.1983.0210
  56. Pew Research Center. (2024). Topic: Prayer in schools. 25 Eylül 2025 tarihinde erişildi. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-sheet/topic-prayer-in-schools/
  57. Rosenberger v. Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia, 515 U.S. 819 (1995).
  58. Roy, L. S. (2010). Salazar v. Buono: The perils of piecemeal adjudication. Northwestern University Law Review, 105, 72–84.
  59. Salazar v. Buono, 559 U.S. 700 (2010).
  60. Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe, 530 U.S. 290 (2000).
  61. School District of the City of Grand Rapids v. Ball, 473 U.S. 373 (1985).
  62. Schragger, R., Schwartzman, M. ve Tebbe, N. (2025). Reestablishing religion. University of Chicago Law Review, 92, 199–252.
  63. Schuneman, N. A. (2007). One nation, under... the watchmaker?: Intelligent design and the Establishment Clause. BYU Journal of Public Law, 22, 179–227.
  64. Sezer, A. (2000). Türk ve Amerikan yüksek mahkeme kararlarında din-vicdan ve din-devlet ilişkisi [Yüksek lisans tezi, Marmara Üniversitesi].
  65. Shurtleff v. City of Boston, 596 U.S. 243 (2022).
  66. Stephen, E. M. (2025). Transformations to the religious clauses under the Roberts Court. Religion Compass, 19(4), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/rec3.70016 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/rec3.70016
  67. Stoianoff, M. (2021). Standing still: American Legion & the limits of judicial review. Syracuse Law Review, 71, 1535–1558.
  68. Stone v. Graham, 449 U.S. 39 (1980). DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/128705
  69. Storslee, M. (2024). History and the school prayer cases. Virginia Law Review, 110, 1619–1682. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5031382
  70. Town of Greece v. Galloway, 572 U.S. 565 (2014).
  71. Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia, Inc. v. Comer, 582 U.S. 449 (2017).
  72. Van Orden v. Perry, 545 U.S. 677 (2005).
  73. Wallace v. Jaffree, 472 U.S. 38 (1985). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/001979398503800329
  74. Walz v. Tax Commission of the City of New York, 397 U.S. 664 (1970).
  75. West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943).
  76. Witters v. Washington Department of Services for the Blind, 474 U.S. 481 (1986).
  77. Wolman v. Walter, 433 U.S. 229 (1977).
  78. Zelman v. Simmons-Harris, 536 U.S. 639 (2002).
  79. Zobrest v. Catalina Foothills School District, 509 U.S. 1 (1993).
  80. Zorach v. Clauson, 343 U.S. 306 (1952).
  81. Zucker, J. E. (2007). Better a Catholic than a Communist: Reexamining McCollum v. Board of Education and Zorach v. Clauson. Virginia Law Review, 93, 2069–2118.