In Doremus et al. v. Board of Education of the Borough of Hawthorne et al., 1951, the U.S Supreme Court ruled that a New Jersey law requiring daily Bible readings in public schools did not violate the First Amendment's Establishment Clause because it was non-denominational and students could opt out without penalty. The plaintiffs, who were parents of children attending these schools, argued that this practice violated their religious freedom rights by promoting Christianity over other religions or non-religion. However, the court held that they lacked standing to sue as taxpayers since there was no direct financial impact from this policy on them personally or on taxpayers generally; thus they had suffered no injury-in-fact necessary for standing under Article III of Constitution. This case is significant as it set precedent for future cases regarding religion in public schools and taxpayer standing to challenge such policies.

In the dissenting opinion for Doremus et al. v. Board of Education of the Borough of Hawthorne et al., Justice Hugo Black argued that taxpayers have a right to challenge government actions which they believe violate the Establishment Clause, regardless if there is no direct financial harm caused by those actions. He disagreed with the majority's decision to dismiss this case on procedural grounds and believed it should be decided on its merits instead. According to him, reading Bible verses in public schools was an unconstitutional endorsement of religion by state authorities, even if participation was voluntary and non-denominational in nature. This practice violated separation between church and state as mandated by First Amendment according to his interpretation.