The Supreme Court just released a 5-4 decision in the case of Espinoza V. Montana that struck down a provision in the state constitution banning public funds to religious schools.
The decision seems to be narrowly tailored to say that if a state provides aid to private schools, it can’t bar aid to religious schools. I will post expert opinions on this as soon as they are available.
The many rightwing groups arguing on behalf of the plaintiffs (Espinoza) said that the ban was rooted in 19th century anti-Catholic bigotry (Blaine amendments), but Montana’s ban was enacted in 1972.
The decision will be celebrated by DeVos and other conservatives but it is not the knockout blow they were hoping for. If states don’t fund any private schools, they don’t have to fund religious schools. Conservatives were hoping to tear down Jefferson’s “wall of separation between church and state.” That didn’t happen.
The Los Angeles Times reported, in a story titled “Religious Schools Are Entitled to State Grants Given to Other Private Schools, Supreme Court Rules”:
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that states may not exclude religious schools from tuition grants that support other private schools.
The justices, by a 5-4 vote, decided that denying grants to students in church schools amounts to unconstitutional discrimination against religion.
The decision is a victory for advocates of school choice, and a setback for those favoring strict interpretation of the principle of church and state separation.
Montana, like more than 30 other states, has a long-standing state constitutional provision that forbids spending tax money to support churches and their affiliates. On that basis, the state supreme court blocked a state-sponsored scholarship program that would give grants to parents sending their children to private and parochial schools.
The Wall Street Journal reported:
WASHINGTON—The Supreme Court struck down a Montana constitutional provision banning state aid to parochial schools, ruling that states cannot exclude religious institutions from programs benefiting nonsectarian private schools.
The program began in 2015 and provided up to $150 in tax credits for donations to scholarship funds that helped students attend private schools. State tax authorities determined that donations to religious schools didn’t qualify. Then Montana’s Supreme Court, citing a state constitutional ban on state aid to sectarian schools, struck down the whole program.
Some parents who sought to send their children to Stillwater Christian School in Kalispell, Mont., said they couldn’t afford the tuition without the program, and otherwise would have to rely on public schools.
In an appeal to the U.S Supreme Court, these challengers argued that the state constitution’s ban stems from a 19th century bias against Catholics and their parochial schools—and that the state constitution violated the federal Constitution by discriminating against church schools.
Many other states have similar restrictions, often called Blaine amendments after Rep. James Blaine (R., Maine), who unsuccessfully proposed a similar provision for the federal Constitution.
While anti-Catholic bias helped fuel the 19th century drive for Blaine amendments, Montana argued that its 1972 constitutional convention, which re-enacted the provision, had not been tainted by religious bigotry.
Conservative groups backing the Montana suit hoped it would pave the way for broader taxpayer subsidy of religious schools through vouchers and other programs, in the wake of the Supreme Court’s relaxation of the separation between church and state in recent years.
The ed reform echo chamber are celebrating it because it opens the door to religious charter schools.
Still no work, effort or investment expended on public schools, however.
Now that they’ve taken care of their preferred schools- privates and charters, do you think any of them will get around to doing anything productive for the unfashionable 90% who attend the “government schools”?
I
“do you think any of them will get around to doing anything productive for the unfashionable 90% who attend the “government schools”?
NO
Expecting “any of them” to get around to doing anything productive for
public schools,
seems like expecting GM to get around to doing anything productive for FORD.
Understanding what a system is and is not, is central…
I am not a lawyer but I am in the process of reading the arguments. I wonder anyone recognizes that DIane’s historical understanding of the date of Nevada’s Blaine amendment versus the initial anti-catholic push for Blaine amendments. I also wonder if anyone brings up the taxcredits and other schemes that subsidize school choice.
For anyone who wants the text of this ruling, see
Click to access 18-1195_g314.pdf
Laura,
James G. Blaine proposed an amendment to the Constitution in 1875 that would have barred any public funding of religious schools. It passed the House, but failed to win a 2/3 vote in the Senate. Thirty-eight states adopted their own Blaine amendment to protect public funding for public schools. Blaine’s mother was an Irish Catholic, and an article in the Catholic Historical Review suggests that he was baptized as a Catholic, and thus the first baptized Catholic to be nominated for president. Apparently he became a Protestant; his funeral was held at a Presbyterian church.
The Blaine amendment may have been motivated by anti-Catholic bias; it was certainly endorsed by nativists who did not want Catholic schools to receive public funds. Anti-Catholicism ran strong in the 1840s-1880s.
But all this is irrelevant to the prohibition in Montana that was struck down by the Supreme Court today. The Montana constitutional amendment was written and adopted in 1972. It is absurd to say that it was inspired by James G. Blaine or anti-Catholic bias.
I am aware of that history ans some it is cited in this case.
noooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Laura, thanks for the text. I have to read this.
https://wordpress.com/post/bobshepherdonline.wordpress.com/2472
I wonder…
How does one separate God from Church, Church from State?
Dewey:
Every teacher should realize he is a social servant set apart for the maintenance of the proper
social order and the securing of the right social growth. In this way the teacher is always the
prophet of the true God and the usherer in of the true kingdom of heaven.
“In God we trust” on the back of bucks.
IKE addition of “Under God” in the pledge…
God generally doesn’t ask for payment from the state.
Wasn’t it Rome that demanded tribute? And Jesus said, as I recall, something to effect of, “Hell, no!”
Greg, you are thinking of, “Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s. Render unto God that which is Gods.” So, he was saying, “Yeah. Pay your taxes.”
Thanks, Bob. I’m no theologian, but I think I could play one on tv!
Greg,
I bet you could play a president on TV. Look at Trump.
Not sure if that’s an insult or not!
But watching Biden give speech now and answering press questions with honesty and respect sure makes me feel better about his candidacy and possible presidency. What a breath of much needed fresh air!
It is definitely not an insult.
You would be a far better president than he-who-must-not-be-named.
Hmmm. I guess we can’t separate myth from history! 🙂
Post-Espinoza Business Plan 1 (We Put the Duh in Flor-uh-duh):
Come on down to our “Race to the Top of Mount Zion Enrollment Jubilee” in the old K-Mart parking lot this Saturday and sign yore kids up for Bob Shepherd’s Real Good Floruhduh School. You can use yore Florida State Scholarships to pay for it, and so its absolutely FREE!!!! No longer due you havta send yore children to them gobbermint schools run by Socialists whar they will be taut to be transgendered! We offer compleet curriculems, wrote by Bob’s girlfriend Darlene herself, including
World HIStory (from Creation to Babylon to the Rapshure)
Political Science (We thank you, Lord, for Donald Trump; the Second Amendmint; and protecting our Borders from invading hoardes of rapists and murderers)
English (the offishul langwidge of the United States, and the langwidge the Bible was wrote in)
Science (the six days of creation; how to make yore own buckshot; and how Cain and Abel survived among the dinosaurs)
Economics (when rich people get tax brakes, that makes you richer)
And much, much more!!! Plus, you don’t havta worry yore hed about safety, cause all are teachers is locked and loaded!
Bob’s Real Good Florurduh Skool, located across from Bob’s Gun and Pawn right next to Wild Wuornos’s Adult Novelties.
It’s been real good runnin’ this here skool. Free innerprize! So much better then tryin to live on Darlene’s disability! Make America Grate Agin!
Post-Espinoza Business Plan 1 (Akashic Kakistonics, or Opening Heaven’s Gate to Every Child):
Tired of those failing public schools? Want to send your child a true Akashic Academy where he/she/they can receive nourishment for the mind AND the soul?
Then enroll him/her/them in Enlightened Master Bob’s AYAHUASCA SCHOOL FOR LITTLE COSMIC VOYAGERS.
Here at Enlightened Master Bob’s, your child will learn how he or she can skip breakfast, lunch, and dinner and draw nourishment directly from Father Sun in our Solar Temple.
We offer complete holistic health training, using our proprietary textbooks on the Ethereal Body, including uncapping and aligning children’s Chakras so they can download DIRECTLY from the Mother Ship the Cosmic Light necessary for the coming Transformation from Earth-bound Homo Sapiens to Interdimensional Beings.
In our history classes, students will learn all about Atlantis, Lemuria, Camelot and Glastonbury, the Black Rock Desert, and other places of Places of Power throughout the Ages.
Students will also learn how to protect themselves against the forces of the Evil Galactic Emperor Xenu and his band of sometimes invisible, shape-shifting reptilian aliens from Alpha Draconis.
But don’t delay! Soon, as our galaxy moves into proximity to the Pleiades, the vibrational tone of the entire planet will rise to such a pitch that we will either undergo Ascension or explode, and everything—the FATE OF THE PLANET– depends on how many young Lightworkers we can bring into Alignment and Cosmic Consciousness before then!
Of course, all this is absolutely FREE because you can use your State Scholarship Voucher to pay for it.
And best yet, all classes are taught by the Spiritual Wives of Enlightened Master Bob himself!!!!
Espinosa is one-half of the evidence- the court majority is owned by Charles Koch,
the other half is the SCOTUS case, Kristin Biel v. St. James Catholic school.
Charles Koch is the despot in the Jefferson quote, “In all ages and in all countries, the priest is in alliance with the despot”.
Trump and his supporters are liars and one of those lies is the false flag of anti-Catholicism. The lie erodes an essential distinction- religious political activities that ram theocracy’s evil down the throats of Americans is different from acceptance of people who choose to follow beliefs without politicizing them. The important caveat – beware the community threat from religion’s leaders who are sexist, racist, exploitive and flagrantly violate American law e.g. coverups of child sex abuse and tax avoidance while promoting political candidates, using the guise of “charity”.
Those who naively think that if Trump is defeated in November, theocracy and oligarchy won’t still be running a shadow government including judiciary, are fools.
Linda,
It sure would be a step forward. If Trump is re-elected, he will own the Supreme Court and the Senate. And yes, we will see what theocracy looks like, as administered by a godless fool.
That’s why elections are not ends, as too many, some here, believe. They are vital events in an ongoing, never-ending process.
Greg-
From bio info you’ve provided at the blog, you have experience with issue campaigns. Have you in your career, witnessed a situation where an issue had two opponents, both formidable and, each requiring a different strategic battle plan but, there was unwillingness to acknowledge one of the enemies?
You have stumped me, Linda. I can’t think of one in American political history. This is not to say there hasn’t been, but I can’t think of one. As I think of world history, the only two examples that come to mind are South Vietnam and the split between the SPD and Communists in Weimar Germany. But that’s a tough one. I’ll have to think about this.
Thanks
I downloaded the text of ESPINOZA ET AL. v. MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE ET AL and read the dissents. Here are a few gems, all noting that the scholarship in question had already been made invalid by Montana’s Supreme Court !!
BREYER, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which KAGAN, J., joined as to Part I.
I shall assume, for purposes of this opinion, that petitioners’ free exercise claim survived the Montana Supreme Court’s wholesale invalidation of the tax credit program. (This is a feature in all of the dissents. Essentially, the dissenters claim there is no case because the program was made vaporware by the Montana Supreme Court.)
Breyer then begins an extended discussion of “entanglements” of the Free Exercise Clause and the Establishment Clause: and concludes that “The majority’s approach and its conclusion in this case, I fear, risk the kind of entanglement and conflict that the Religion Clauses are intended to prevent. I consequently dissent.
Well, that is the summary, but it is followed by at least 6000 words, as if prepared to show his colleagues that he had considered a lot of precedents that had no direct bearing on the case, these dating back to Madison and Jefferson’s Wall of Separation in Antebellum Virginia, along with hypothetical questions about state funding for charter schools (with a 2003 citation).
GINSBURG, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which KAGAN, J., joined.
Recall that the Montana court remedied the state constitutional violation by striking the scholarship program in its entirety. Under that decree, secular and sectarian schools alike are ineligible for benefits, so the decision cannot be said to entail differential treatment based on petitioners’ religion.
Put somewhat differently, petitioners argue that the Free Exercise Clause requires a State to treat institutions and people neutrally when doling out a benefit—and neutrally is how Montana treats them in the wake of the state court’s decision. Accordingly, the Montana Supreme Court’s decision does not place a burden on petitioners’ religious exercise. Petitioners may still send their children to a religious school. And the Montana Supreme Court’s decision does not pressure them to do otherwise.
SOTOMAYOR, J., filed a dissenting opinion.
The majority holds that a Montana scholarship program unlawfully discriminated against religious schools by excluding them from a tax benefit. The threshold problem, however, is that such tax benefits no longer exist for anyone in the State. The Montana Supreme Court invalidated the program on state-law grounds, thereby foreclosing the as-applied challenge petitioners raise here.
Indeed, nothing required the state court to uphold the program or the state legislature to maintain it. The Court nevertheless reframes the case and appears to ask whether a longstanding Montana constitutional provision is facially invalid under the Free Exercise Clause, even though petitioners disavowed bringing such a claim. But by resolving a constitutional question not presented, the Court fails to heed Article III principles older than the Religion Clause it expounds.
I am not a lawyer, but I cannot understand why this case even got on the docket of the US. Supreme Court. It was settled in the Montana Supreme Court, made invalid, struck entirely.
I feel sick, and I am a Christian.
Thanks to the LA Times for writing about religion.