High Court Signals Backing for Tax Dollars at Religious Schools
The U.S. Supreme Court's conservatives cast doubt on a Maine program that covers the cost of private education in parts of the state that don't have public schools but bars use of the funds at schools that promote religion.
December 08, 2021 at 02:47 PM
3 minute read
The U.S. Supreme Court signaled it is poised to strengthen the rights of parents to use public dollars to pay tuition at faith-based schools.
Hearing arguments Wednesday in Washington, the court's conservatives cast doubt on a Maine program that covers the cost of private education in parts of the state that don't have public schools but bars use of the funds at schools that promote religion.
Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. and Justice Samuel Alito said the state was discriminating on the basis of religious beliefs. Justice Brett Kavanaugh said two families challenging the exclusion of religious schools "are seeking equal treatment, not special treatment."
The case gives school-choice advocates a chance to reinforce a line of Supreme Court rulings that have backed voucher programs and, to at least some degree, required states to include religious schools.
The families say the Maine policy violates the Constitution's free exercise clause because it forces them to choose between a public benefit and their religious rights.
Under the program, areas that lack their own public schools can contract with nearby institutions to send students there or instead can pay tuition at a public or approved private school chosen by the parents. State policy requires the private schools to be nonsectarian, meaning they don't teach through the lens of a particular faith.
The families are seeking to extend rulings favoring the use of taxpayer funds to pay religious school tuition. In 2002, a 5-4 court ruled that voucher programs don't violate the constitutional separation of church and state even if most of the money goes to religious schools. In 2020, the court in 2020 voted 5-4 to reinstate a Montana scholarship program used primarily to send children to religious schools.
Maine says its program is distinct from those the court reviewed in previous cases. The state says its system is a means of providing a public education in sparsely populated areas, not an effort to subsidize private schooling.
Of the state's 180,000 school-age children, about 4,500 attend private schools chosen by the parents. That number represents the vast majority at 11 schools known colloquially as "town academies."
Maine says it and Vermont are the only states that use private schools in place of public schools, rather than as an alternative under a school-choice program.
A federal appeals court said the Maine program was constitutional because it excludes schools based on the material they teach, rather than on their status as religious institutions. Although the Supreme Court has relied on that so-called use/status distinction in past cases, religious-rights advocates say it lacks any constitutional basis and should be discarded.
The program is being challenged by David and Amy Carson, who say they are entitled to tuition assistance for sending their daughter to Bangor Christian School, and Troy and Angela Nelson, who say they haven't been able to afford to send their children to Temple Academy, another religious school.
The case is Carson v. Makin, 20-1088.
Greg Stohr reports for Bloomberg News.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllPlaintiffs Attorneys Awarded $113K on $1 Judgment in Noise Ordinance Dispute
4 minute readUS Judge Cannon Blocks DOJ From Releasing Final Report in Trump Documents Probe
3 minute readRead the Document: DOJ Releases Ex-Special Counsel's Report Explaining Trump Prosecutions
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Rejuvenation of a Sharp Employer Non-Compete Tool: Delaware Supreme Court Reinvigorates the Employee Choice Doctrine
- 2Mastering Litigation in New York’s Commercial Division Part V, Leave It to the Experts: Expert Discovery in the New York Commercial Division
- 3GOP-Led SEC Tightens Control Over Enforcement Investigations, Lawyers Say
- 4Transgender Care Fight Targets More Adults as Georgia, Other States Weigh Laws
- 5Roundup Special Master's Report Recommends Lead Counsel Get $0 in Common Benefit Fees
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250