The U.S. Supreme Court will hear a case called Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue that will determine whether the United States–or any state–may still respect a separation of church and state.

In the wake of Donald Trump’s choice of two far-right Justices to the Supreme Court, this case might well be decided in a way that removes all prohibitions on the use of public funds for religious schools.

The facts of the case are these: Like many states, Montana’s state constitution forbids the funding of religious schools. The Montana legislature passed a tax credit program that funds vouchers for religious schools. The Montana Supreme Court ruled that the law violated the state constitution. Now, the case is before the U.S. Supreme Court.

Many states have such prohibitions (and in some of them, like Indiana and Florida, the state courts decided to ignore the explicit language of the state constitution and allow vouchers for religious schools on the claim that the money goes to the family not the religious school that actually gets the public money). The typical attack on state bans on funding religious schools is that such prohibitions are “Blaine amendments,” adopted in the late 19th century at the height of anti-Catholic bigotry; because they were passed in a spirit of bigotry, the argument goes, they should be struck down.

In Montana, the prohibition on funding religious schools is not a Blaine amendment. It was the product of a Montana state constitutional convention in 1972.

Advocates of vouchers will nonetheless make the same argument, ignoring the facts.

Will the Supreme Court care? Or will it placate demands for religious “freedom” by preventing states from keeping public money only in public schools?

If the Espinoza case is decided against Montana, we can anticipate public funding of evangelical Christian schools, Catholic schools, Yeshivas, and Madrassas, as well as the schools of every imaginable sect and religious group.

Somehow this does not seem to be what the Founders had in mind when they created this nation more than 200 years ago. They were not anti-religion, but they did not want religious tests for office or any religious establishment of religion with public funds.

Here is an amicus brief in the Espinoza case written by “Public Funds Public Schools,” a collaboration of legal organizations that support civil rights and civil liberties, the Education Law Center, the Southern Poverty Law Center, the SPLC Action Fund, and Munger, Tolles, and Olson LLP.