statutory and regulatory provisions do not apply. 15 . Intervenors aptly point out that while the Supreme Court of the United States has permitted states to mandate parental involvement in a minor’s abortion decision, provided that the minor retains a constitutionally adequate alternative such as a judicial bypass procedure, the Court has never held that the government is compelled to involve parents. 16 . To support their constitutional argument on parental rights, Plaintiffs cite several Establishment clause cases. When a public school engages in or promotes practices which involve religion, students and parents need not show coercion to prevail in an Establishment Clause challenge. See, e.g.,; School Dist. v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203, 223, 83 S.Ct. 1560, 1572, 10 L.Ed.2d 844 (1963) (<HOLDING>); Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421, 430, 82 S.Ct.
holding that rluipa violates establishment clause holding no violation of federal establishment clause holding that discrimination based on religion is subjected to strict scrutiny whether a claim arises under the establishment clause the free exercise clause of equal protection clause holding that establishment clause claim need not be predicated on coercion holding that establishment of christmas day as legal public holiday did not violate establishment clause