Democrats are pissed. The US Supreme Court has broken out that constitution-thingy and rained on their education monopoly parade. How so? It has been a long-standing policy for states to exclude religious schools from their tuitioning programs, but this has been ruled unconstitutional.
And in the simplest of terms.
Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the majority opinion that while “a state need not subsidize private education” that “once a state decides to do so, it cannot disqualify some private schools solely because they are religious.”
“Maine’s ‘nonsectarian’ requirement for its otherwise generally available tuition assistance payments violates the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment,” Roberts wrote. “Regardless of how the benefit and restriction are described, the program operates to identify and exclude otherwise eligible schools on the basis of their religious exercise.”
Roberts said that the program “effectively penalizes the free exercise” of religion by doling out benefits based upon whether a school is religious.
To be clear, the decision is 45 pages long, but that excerpt explains everything you need to know. It’s an all-or-nothing affair. And I’m sure the left would be OK with the nothing part of that equation given a chance, and in some jurisdictions, they will. But it’s a PR gamble to consign poor and low-income families to what are typically terrible public schools when they could – if given a chance – find a better fit to help children learn and grow.
Democrats could care less for all their blather about kids and schools. Public Education is little more than a laundromat for campaign contributions and union boots on the ground. Schools serve little purpose outside of that unless you want to add ensuring they remain soft targets to advance anti-gun legislation. There’s no limit to the number of dead children they’ll climb to disarm law-abiding Americans.
As for Carson v. Makin, it has some bearing on New Hampshire, which has a tuitioning law that, in theory, can no longer restrict any school regardless of faith – a constant burr of contention for the progs. And a problem for liberal justices, according to Sonia Sotomayor.
“What a difference five years makes. In 2017, I feared that the Court was ‘lead[ing] us . . . to a place where separation of church and state is a constitutional slogan, not a constitutional commitment.’ Today, the Court leads us to a place where separation of church and state becomes a constitutional violation. “
Notice how she never says it is in the Constitution, but it’s a commitment. Yes, wise Latina, the same way the Constitution obligates serving chips with tuna sandwiches and tomato soup with grilled cheese.
