The Supreme Court has a very busy summer docket of landmark court cases to hear, but one very important case for those fighting for religious freedom just came down. The case of Trinity Lutheran Church v. Comer centers on a Missouri Department of Natural Resources grant program. Non-profit organizations could apply to receive grants from the department to purchase rubberized playground surfaces made from recycled automobile tires. Trinity Lutheran Church applied for the grant. They simply wanted to participate in the state program like everyone else.
The Missouri department rejected the church’s grant application based solely on the degree they were a religiously affiliated organization, and thus deemed them ineligible by the department to receive the grant. Trinity applied to resurface their preschool and day care playground equipment—not their church parking lot or any other area used only for religious services. By allowing the day care to enroll children of all faiths (or no faith), the church provides a secular benefit available to anyone and everyone in the community.
On June 26, the Supreme Court voted 7-2 and ruled in Trinity’s favor. In short, religious institutions cannot be excluded from state programs. In the majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts stated that the state of Missouri does not have the right to deny a generally available benefit because of religious identity: “The express discrimination against religious exercise here is not the denial of a grant, but rather the refusal to allow the Church – solely because it is a church – to compete with secular organizations for a grant,” Roberts said.
It makes sense. If someone was denied the same grant based on ethnicity or gender, it would be plastered all over the mainstream media. A grant can’t be denied because of religion either. After all, you wouldn’t deny a secular benefit to Latino women or to Asian men.
Proponents of the decision say that it eases funding restrictions for religious organizations, and are hoping that a lot more churches will now start applying for funds that they are otherwise eligible for.
Opponents of the decision say that churches already greatly benefit from public funding like non-profit status tax benefits and police and fire services. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) went as far as saying that Trinity Lutheran did not deserve the grant because they would likely be providing prayer and religious instruction or activities on the playground, and since it was taxpayer-funded, the playground shouldn’t be approved because its use wasn’t secular.
Justice Roberts made it very clear that this case was a very narrow ruling and did not apply to any other case involving either religion or government funding. But some are hopeful that this precedent-setting case will be the foundation used for future church v. state battles in the future. One of these is school vouchers. With this ruling, it is clear that state funding of secular activities of religious institutions can take place.
University of Virginia Law School professor Douglas Laycock says that the June 26 ruling makes state Blaine Amendments unconstitutional. Many states have Blaine Amendments in their constitutions that prohibit state governments from using public money to fund religious schools. Interestingly, the amendment was proposed in 1875 for the U.S. Constitution but it failed, but over 30 states have adopted the provision.
It is also important to remember the broad scope of scenarios under which churches might receive public funds. If Trinity had lost this case, it might have meant that churches couldn’t receive public funds from FEMA in cases of natural disasters like tornados or floods. That doesn’t seem quite fair when everyone else is getting funds to rebuild, now does it?
Justices Ginsburg and Sotomayor were the two dissenting opinions, who argued that providing the rubberizing grant to Trinity Lutheran threatened our constitutional order and all we hold dear. (Wow! Really?)
Justices ruling in the majority were Roberts, Alito, Thomas, Kennedy, and newest justice Gorsuch, and the two more liberal-leaning judges, Kagan and Breyer.
Basically, religious institutions will no longer be automatically disqualified from government aid programs. It is a refreshing ruling showing that people who are religious do not have to check their religious identities at the door when they participate in public activities. Nice to hear.
~ Christian Patriot Daily
