The U.S. Supreme Court has decided it will hear an appeal from a lower court decision in a challenge to a Colorado law. That law allowed the state to exclude religious preschool providers from a government program that gives “all kids with 15 hours per week of free education at a private or public school of their parents’ choice in the year before kindergarten.”
Though the Colorado program is supposed to be “universal,” it includes regulations that effectively exclude religious providers by making their participation contingent on adopting views about marriage and sexuality. For instance, Catholic and other religious schools must be willing to admit students whose families object to the teachings of the school or to make accommodations based on gender identity, even where doing so would be contrary to the religious mission of the school.
For parents whose religious convictions require them to influence their children’s education in ways consistent with their faith, this means they can either pay for a religious education or receive public support for an education that ignores or is at odds with their deepest convictions.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, however, held that because the program did not categorically exclude all religious schools, the impact on the religious exercise of some parents and schools did not constitute a violation of the First Amendment.
The eminent religious freedom law firm, Becket, sought review from the Supreme Court, which decided on April 20 that it would take the case.
Sutherland Institute filed a brief encouraging the Court to weigh in. The brief argues that Colorado’s refusal to accommodate religious schools impermissibly burdens the religious exercise of families and religious schools. It also explains that it is no less problematic that the Colorado law excludes religious schools by imposing regulations they cannot comply with than it would be if the state simply said it refused to work with religious schools.
The Court will consider the case in its next term, beginning in October. Its eventual decision will likely give important guidance to lower courts assessing state and federal laws that impose regulations on religious exercise.
