This morning, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in yet another case involving government discrimination against religious schools. The case, Carson v. Makin, involves the State of Maine’s tuition assistance program which makes funds available to help eligible families send their children to a school of their choice—unless the State deems the school to be too religious or “sectarian.” This exclusion particularly harms poor, religious families living in rural school districts in Maine that lack a public high school. These otherwise eligible families are compelled by law to enroll their children in school but cannot choose to use the tuition-assistance funds to enroll their children in a “sectarian” school.
Not surprisingly, several of the justices focused their attention on how the State determines which schools can be excluded as “sectarian.” According to the State, it tries to draw a distinction between a school’s religious status versus a school’s religious use. In other words, a school will not be excluded just because it is religiously affiliated or religious-in-name-only. Rather, a school will be excluded if the education it provides is too religious and actually serves to promote religious beliefs or a religious worldview. A few justices appeared deeply concerned that such a distinction was itself a form of impermissible discrimination between religious schools. A religious school that sought to promote popular values such as equity, equality, and generosity would likely not be excluded because those values are often taught in public schools as well. But a religious school that sought to promote unpopular beliefs such as the Catholic Church’s teachings on marriage and human sexuality would be excluded.
In 2002, the Supreme Court held in Zelman v.Simmons-Harris that the First Amendment does not require the government to exclude religious schools from school-choice programs. It is not an unconstitutional establishment of religion to allow parents to use funds to help their children attend a religious school. The Supreme Court recognized that the parent’s role in choosing the school removes any concern that the State is somehow establishing religion by providing the parents with tuition assistance.
Just last year, in Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue, the Supreme Court held that a state cannot exclude religious schools from an otherwise generally available benefit on account of the school’s religious character. Chief Justice Roberts wrote, “A State need not subsidize private education. But once a State decides to do so, it cannot disqualify some private schools solely because they are religious.”
The Court’s decisions in Zelman and Espinoza likely spell doom for Maine’s case in Carson. The Supreme Court’s decision in Carson could further accelerate the growing school-choice movement and pave the way for increased enrollment in religious schools.
As we have noted here and here, increased enrollment at religious schools will likely lead to land use and zoning cases as religious schools look to expand or relocate to meet the increased demand. At Dalton & Tomich, we are already seeing an increase in the number of religious land use cases that we file on behalf of religious schools. Far too many religious school leaders are completely unaware of the substantial protections religious schools are afforded under the Religious Land Use & Institutionalized Persons Act, 42 U.S.C. 2000cc et seq. (RLUIPA). This is exactly why we have written a guide to help religious schools better understand and assert their rights.
Have you recently purchased a building or land and discovered you can’t use it because it isn’t zoned for religious assembly? Learn how to navigate the process and win the right to use your property.Download Now
If you are looking to establish a new school, or if your religious school is seeking to expand its campus or add on to existing facilities, you need to be aware of how RLUIPA protects religious institutions against burdensome and discriminatory land use regulations.
Dalton & Tomich, PLC is the national leader in successfully helping churches, other religious institutions and their insurers defend their rights in land use and zoning matters under RLUIPA, the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act. We have helped clients win cases against municipalities and other local government bodies from coast to coast, with experience serving both as general counsel and special litigation counsel.
In 2015, Hope Rising Community Church experienced extreme opposition, the kind that would force it to close its doors and leave behind the families and youth it was so passionate about reaching. As the lead pastor I felt helpless, inferior and as if I had no […]Read More
Dalton & Tomich’s assistance in our RLUIPA matter has paved the way for our church to continue serving the community and for new churches in the area to thrive in the future. Thank you from the bottom of our hearts for your stand for religious […]Read More
The Urban Church will be forever grateful to Dalton & Tomich plc for navigating it through a difficult land use issue. Let them give you honest and caring advice because that’s exactly what they’ll do.Read More
Dalton & Tomich, PLC defended a complicated case at a church we insure. Not only is the firm professional, they understand how church business runs and work well within church leadership.Read More
Dalton & Tomich, PLC helped us immensely in the areas of litigation and negotiation! Their professionalism and understanding of church policy helped our church be victorious in a modern day religious land use battle. RLUIPA Religious Land Use Case: Lighthouse Community Church of GodRead More
Dalton & Tomich, PLC serves as General Counsel for the 144 churches within the Church of God in Michigan. The firm provides the legal expertise we need in dealing with the issues that arise during the course of fulfilling our ministry.Read More
I met Dan Dalton during a dark time for our church. He was recommended as the leading RLUIPA attorney in the nation. He demonstrated wisdom, expertise, a gentle nature, a calming inter-relational skill, genuineness, and a humble demeanor, while at the same time, being sharp, […]Read More
Mr. Dalton’s expertise and experience helped us through a very difficult legal journey, ultimately achieving a favorable outcome. His personal interest in helping our church went “above and beyond” just the call of duty. His understanding of both legal and spiritual matters seems to uniquely […]Read More