From the Courtroom to the Classroom: Creationism, School Prayer, and the Consequences of Legal Framing

This dissertation examines how and why legal frames are constructed and the consequences of those frames. Using historical case studies I explore how movements approach the court, adapt their framing strategy over time, influence the opposition, deal with institutional constraints, and affect media coverage. I also examine how the movement framing done in court matters beyond the court case. I examine two movements, both with extensive legal histories. Since the infamous Scopes monkey trial in 1925, the creationist movement has used the courts to defend anti-evolution policies but, with the exception of this original case, they have experienced nothing but defeat in the courts. The modern school prayer movement was roused by the Engel decision which prohibited teacher led school prayer in 1962. Since then, the movement has been successful in court in a couple of instances and unsuccessful in others. Using legal briefs, trial transcripts, depositions, and judicial decisions I present the framing that the movement presented to the courts and explain why certain frames were chosen and why the framing strategies changed over time. Drawing on the social movement framing literature and using it to explain legal interaction I show how movements, if unsuccessful in the prior court case, are likely to adopt their opponents' framing; this must be done carefully to avoid violating the movement's core identity. I also find show, how under certain conditions, legal frames influence future policies and as well as being a key part of the media's narrative.