The Lib Narrative About the Minneapolis ICE Shooting Took Another Brutal Hit
For the Trans Activist Class, It’s All About Them
Ilhan Omar Claims ICE Isn’t Arresting Criminals. Here's Proof That She's Lying.
Check Out President Trump's 'Appropriate and Unambiguous' Response to Heckler
Tim Walz Just Did a Major Flip-Flop on This Minnesota U.S. Attorney
The Latest Update Out of Iran As Regime Attempts to Squash Uprising Will...
U.S. Sees Net Negative Migration for the First Time in Decades
Cut Them Off NOW!
The Prime of Tough-Guy Progressivism
US Halts Immigrant Visas From 75 Countries Over Welfare Abuse Concerns
Living Through Iran’s Slaughter: One Iranian Woman Describes the Horror and Hope Under...
Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey Shrugs Off Assaults on ICE Agents: They Are Standing...
ACLU Lawyer Stumped When Justice Alito Asks for the Definition of Man and...
Watch: Woman Dragged Out of Car by ICE After Impeding Enforcement Operations in...
Time to Crack Down on Fraud
Tipsheet

Supreme Court Hands Down Huge Victory on School Choice

AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite

The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 Tuesday morning that government tuition assistance programs cannot discriminate against religious schools. The opinion is from Carson v. Makin, a case out of Maine. 

Advertisement

"Maine has enacted a program of tuition assistance for parents who live in school districts that do not operate a secondary school of their own. Under the program, parents designate the secondary school they would like their child to attend—public or private—and the school district transmits payments to that school to help defray the costs of tuition. Most private schools are eligible to receive the payments, so long as they are 'nonsectarian,'" the majority opinion, written by Chief Justice John Roberts, states. "The question presented is whether this restriction violates the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment."

"The Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment protects against 'indirect coercion or penalties on the free exercise of religion, not just outright prohibitions,'" the opinion states. "A State’s antiestablishment interest does not justify enactments that exclude some members of the community from an otherwise generally available public benefit because of their religious exercise."

Advertisement

The ruling is being celebrated as a win for school choice.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement