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
© 2024 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 All'Serious Disruptions'?: Federal Courts Brace for Government Shutdown Threat
3 minute readDivided State Court Reinstates Dispute Over Replacement Vehicles Fees
5 minute readSecond Circuit Ruling Expands VPPA Scope: What Organizations Need to Know
6 minute read'They Got All Bent Out of Shape:' Parkland Lawyers Clash With Each Other
Trending Stories
- 1Decision of the Day: Judge Reduces $287M Jury Verdict Against Harley-Davidson in Wrongful Death Suit
- 2Kirkland to Covington: 2024's International Chart Toppers and Award Winners
- 3Decision of the Day: Judge Denies Summary Judgment Motions in Suit by Runner Injured in Brooklyn Bridge Park
- 4KISS, Profit Motive and Foreign Currency Contracts
- 512 Days of … Web Analytics
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
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