the training program be “chosen by [ML’s] mother.” The instant condition therefore is consonant with the Florida Constitution and our holding in L.M. II. We note however that some uncertainty exists as to the meaning of “spiritual,” as opposed to “moral,” training. The State at oral argument conceded, and we agree, that “spiritual” training, to the extent that it means religious training, is unconstitutional. We therefore strike the words “and spiritual” from the judge’s order. The Federal Constitution The United States Supreme Court tells us how to evaluate legislation to determine whether the legislation violates the First Amendment of the United States Constitution: The legislation must pass the three-part test of Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602, 91 S.Ct. 2105, 29 L.Ed.2d 745 (1971) (<HOLDING>). The court explains the Lemon test: Under the
holding mere deviation unconstitutional holding that amendment to bankruptcy act was unconstitutional because it infringed upon state sovereignty holding that state bans on samesex marriage are unconstitutional holding pennsylvania state ethics act unconstitutional as applied to former judges holding unconstitutional state aid to nonpublic schools