Exclusion Of Religious Schools From State Scholarship Program Violates Federal Constitution : US Supreme Court

In a notable judgement yesterday in the case Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue ,the U.S Supreme Court reversed an earlier judgment of the Montana State Supreme Court and disregarded a "no-aid" provision promulgated by the Montana State department by finding that it is inconsistent with the Federal Constitution. The U.S.Supreme court ruled in the ratio of 5:4 in which chief justice Robert delivered the opinion of the court joined by Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh, JJ., Ginsburg, J. Along with Kagan, J., and Sotomayor,J., were the judges who filed their dissenting opinions. Among the judges particularly, Breyer,J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Kagan ,J., joined as to Part I of the judgment. The Suit before the US Supreme Court was brought by mothers of three children who attend a private christian school in Montana state. The reason rendered by the parents behind their selection of that particular school is that, "it teaches the same Christian values that [they] teach at home." The decision of the US.Supreme Court is that the no aid provision of the Montana Constitution and the Rule 1 administrative rule viciously violate the free exercise clause of the Federal Constitution. The Free Exercise clause of the Federal Constitution preserves the religious rights against discrimination. The US Supreme Court while deciding the matter had observed that the impunnged provision of the Montana Constitution is in very much against the principles laid under the federal constitution and so many judgments delivered by the Supreme Court. In Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia Inc. v. Comer, 583 U.S, the U.S.Supreme Court had held that, disqualifying otherwise eligible recipients from a public benefit "solely because of their religious character" imposes a penalty on the free exercise of religion that triggers the most exacting scrutiny. The impugned "No-aid" provision designed by the state of Montana is a visible specimen of a document that clearly avoids religious schools from the domain of pubic benefits on the sole reason of religious status. THE MONTANA SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM The Montana Legislature under the intention "to provide parental and student choice in education" had promulgated a scholarship programme for students attending private schools in the year of 2015. The attributes of the programme is that, it grands a tax credit of upto 150 USD to any taxpayer who generously donates to a participating "Student Scholarship Organisation". The Scholarship organisation can utilise the fund generated through donations for the purpose of awarding scholarships to children fro tuition at private schools. The conditions for the Scholarship organisations are, among other requirements, it must maintain an application process for awarding the scholarships and justifiably it must exploit the 90% of all the donations received on awarding scholarship awards and equally it must comply with the state reporting and monitoring requirements. The family of the child ,who wins the scholarship under the program can use the fund at any "qualified education provider" including any private school that qualifies standard accreditation, testing and safety preconditions. Once the family decides the school of their choice, the scholarship organisation must send the fund to the concerned school and it cannot arbitrarily restrict the award to certain type of schools. The legislature of the Montana State had considered this initiative as an aspiring one and allowed a budget of 3 Million USD annually to fund the tax credits which begins in 2016. THE "NO AID" CLAUSE The "no aid" provision is part of Article X, Section 6 of the Montana Comsitituion that bars government aid to sectarian schools. And the provision states as : "Aid prohibited to sectarian schools….. The legislature , counties cities, towns, school districts, and public corporations shall not make any direct or indirect appropriation or payment from any public fund or monies, or any grant of lands or other property for any sectarian purpose or to aid any church, school, academy, seminary, college, university, or other literary or scientific institution, controlled in whole or in part by any church, sect, or denomination." As per the Montana legislature it is mandatory that the Scholarship program must function in accordance with the "no aid" provision. Later the "Rule 1" provision promulgated by the Montana Department of Revenue also invited some criticism from all quarters . The rule 1 provision is an administrative rule act as an embargo for the families in utilising the scholarships at religious schools. The definition of "qualified education provider" had changed negatively and created a situation that rejects any school "owned or controlled in whole or part by any church, religious sect, or denomination" This was vehemently...

Exclusion Of Religious Schools From State Scholarship Program Violates Federal Constitution : US Supreme Court

Viswajith Anand

Tags