'Trinity Lutheran' Supreme Court Decision
ARRA News Service: EdChoice, a national nonprofit organization that promotes state-based educational choice programs, issued the following statement today in response to the Supreme Court's 7-2 decision in Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia v. Comer.
EdChoice Vice President of Programs Leslie Hiner said:"Citizens and faith-based institutions may be religious, and may exercise their faith openly, yet still participate in public life according to the U.S. Supreme Court decision issued this morning in Trinity Lutheran v Comer. This case involved the right of a church to receive a state grant to improve the safety of its playground, but parents using educational choice options to send their children to faith-based schools should find comfort in the words of Justice Gorsuch, who said, '...the general principles here do not permit discrimination against religious exercise—whether on the playground or anywhere else.' The Court ruled that to deny a public benefit to a religious entity solely because it is religious is, 'odious to the Constitution.'
"We do not yet know how this standard might be applied to educational choice programs moving forward, but we are hopeful that this ruling might help knock down barriers in states that prohibit K-12 student from accessing faith-based schooling options." In the majority opinion, the justices argue that excluding religious groups from this kind of state funding would discriminate against them based on religion. Haynes said he expects religious groups to apply for and receive government funding for a wide range of purposes, even in the 30-plus states that have Blaine Amendments that prohibit state funding of religious organizations, including schools.
Sarah Pulliam Bailey noted in The Washington Post:"Trinity Lutheran Church in Missouri, wanted to participate in a state program that reimburses the cost of rubberizing playground surfaces. The state, however, said Trinity Lutheran was not allowed to participate.
If the church lost the case, some were worried that religious institutions could be barred from receiving public funding. For instance, could churches be considered ineligible for funding after natural disasters? And why did some justices disagree over a small footnote in the final ruling? The Post also noted a footnote to this Supreme Court decision."Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote the majority opinion, but Justice Neil M. Gorsuch and Justice Clarence Thomas did not join a footnote where four justices state, 'This case involves express discrimination based on religious identity with respect to playground resurfacing. We do not address religious uses of funding or other forms of discrimination.' Because only four justices joined that footnote, it is technically not considered the opinion of the court."
Tags: SCOTUS Decision, Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia v. Comer, Supreme Court To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
EdChoice Vice President of Programs Leslie Hiner said:
"We do not yet know how this standard might be applied to educational choice programs moving forward, but we are hopeful that this ruling might help knock down barriers in states that prohibit K-12 student from accessing faith-based schooling options."
Sarah Pulliam Bailey noted in The Washington Post:
If the church lost the case, some were worried that religious institutions could be barred from receiving public funding. For instance, could churches be considered ineligible for funding after natural disasters? And why did some justices disagree over a small footnote in the final ruling?
Tags: SCOTUS Decision, Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia v. Comer, Supreme Court To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home