Anti-Faith Hate
States shouldn’t disqualify religious charities
THIS week, the US Supreme Court will hear arguments over whether so-called Blaine Amendments — state constitutional amendments used to block public funding for even secular activities undertaken with a religious motivation — are constitutional. Justice Clarence Thomas observed in 2000 that Blaine Amendments were “born in bigotry” and “should be buried” once and for all. Let’s hope the Supremes do that in the case Espinoza v. Montana.
The amendments date back to the rampant anti-Catholicism of the late 19th century. Sen. James Blaine of Maine pressed for the state-level measures to cut funding from Catholic schools. Since then, activists have often seized upon Blaine Amendments to legally perpetuate his anti-religious bigotry.
I have personal experience with both Blaine Amendments and the
Supreme Court. One of the last times the justices considered these laws, I was there. And lost.
My home state of Washington had awarded me a Promise Scholarship. I wanted to attend an instate religious college to prepare for a career as an ordained minister. But because of Washington’s Blaine Amendment, state officials refused to disburse the funds. Ultimately, in Locke v. Davey, the US Supreme Court agreed with their decision.
The experience changed the trajectory of my life. Instead of completing my theological education, I attended Harvard Law School, inspired by the attorneys who handled my case. Today, my legal practice focuses on complex civil litigation, but I have never forgotten my experience.
That is why when First Liberty Institute asked me to collaborate on a friend-of-the-court brief in Espinoza, I was glad to do so. Our brief explains how Forge Youth Mentoring, a faithbased organization mentoring troubled youth in Washington, almost shut its doors recently when faced with the prospect of losing a grant from the local county government. Activists complained, citing Washington’s Blaine Amendment and
Locke v. Davey (the decision bearing my name), to call the county-administered grant to Forge into question.
Forge pursues a noble mission: helping youth discover their God-given potential by connecting them with older mentors. The county appreciates the group’s work addressing a host of problems faced by youth who lack positive adult influences in their lives. After First Liberty explained that the grant could lawfully continue, the county kept funding Forge. It’s a good thing. Few, if any, secular groups provide similar mentoring services there.
Still, the specter of the Blaine Amendment stalks Forge’s efforts and threatens to bring them to a halt. That would be a sad day, leaving youth in need without a much-needed resource. Government officials should never disqualify the charitable activity of an organization just because of the religion that motivates it.
The Supreme Court moved in the right direction two years ago in Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia v. Comer. There, the high court explained that the Constitution prevents government from denying generally available benefits “solely because of [an organization’s] religious character.” Yet the scope of this decision remains in question.
This week, justices will consider whether parents seeking to provide a quality elementary education for their children can take advantage of a Montana program funded by the donations of private individuals and businesses who receive a tax credit for the donation.
Montana says no. Pointing to its Blaine Amendment, the state refuses to fund scholarships for needy students attending a religious school.
Should the Supreme Court uphold Montana’s Blaine Amendment, it would tell the rest of the country that it is acceptable to exclude faith-based organizations from public benefits, grants and programs because they are religious. Under Montana’s rationale, only purely secular or government-run organizations could access public-benefit programs or contract with state or local governments to benefit the communities that they serve. That is government-enforced secularism, pure and simple.
Picking winners and losers based on their religion is un-American. Religious organizations that care for their communities ought to be welcomed by the government, not excluded. Americans of faith shouldn’t be excluded from public programs simply because of their religious viewpoint.
Blaine Amendments have worked their bigotry long enough. Religious liberty frees people of faith to do great work in their communities. When religious people and organizations are welcomed on equal footing with their secular neighbors, everyone wins.