Morton v. Nebraska is a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the issue of whether a state could require a parent to pay for a child's education in a private school. The case was brought by the parents of a student who had been expelled from a public school in Nebraska for disruptive behavior. The parents argued that the state's requirement that they pay for their child's education in a private school violated their right to free exercise of religion. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the parents, finding that the state's requirement violated their right to free exercise of religion. The Court held that the state could not require parents to pay for a child's education in a private school if the parents had a sincere religious belief that the private school was not in the best interests of their child. The Court also held that the state could not interfere with the parents' right to choose the type of education they believed was best for their child. The Court's decision in Morton v. Nebraska was an important victory for the rights of parents to choose the type of education they believe is best for their children. It established that the state cannot interfere with the parents' right to choose the type of education they believe is best for their children, even if that education is provided in a private school.

Justice Field delivered the dissenting opinion in Morton v. Nebraska, arguing that the state of Nebraska had exceeded its authority by enacting a statute which allowed for an insanity defense to be used in criminal proceedings. He argued that this was a matter of federal law and should not have been left up to individual states to decide upon. Furthermore, he believed that it would lead to unequal protection under the law since different states could potentially have different standards when it came to determining whether or not someone was insane at the time they committed a crime. Justice Field concluded his dissent by stating that if Congress wanted such laws enacted then they should do so instead of leaving it up to each state's discretion as this would create too much confusion and inconsistency among jurisdictions across America.