Will the Supreme Court reject precedent and undermine the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment?

Question

If the federal government gives money directly to a religious school or organization in a manner that clearly violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, can anyone sue to stop it? The answer should be obvious: any taxpayer should be able to sue to prevent his or her tax dollars from being used in a manner that is an unconstitutional establishment of religion.

Unfortunately, President Bush and the religious right disagree.

On Wednesday, February 28, the Supreme Court heard arguments in Hein v Freedom from Religion Foundation, a case that threatens to make the federal government completely immune from challenges when it spends money to support religion.

In a 1968 court case, Flast v Cohen, the Supreme Court recognized an exception to the usual rule that a person cannot sue as a taxpayer to stop the spending of money that violates the Constitution. In that case, the Court said that the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment was meant to be a limit on Congress's taxing and spending power and that therefore taxpayers do have standing to enforce its commands.

Hein v Freedom from Religion Foundation is a challenge to the Bush administration's unprecedented attempt to funnel money to religious entities providing social services. In his first days as President, George W. Bush created an Office of Faith Based and Community Initiatives for the purpose of giving money to religious institutions. The question is whether a taxpayer can bring a challenge to this as violating the Establishment Clause.

It is to be hoped that the Supreme Court will reaffirm Flast v Cohen and allow taxpayers to challenge this effort to support religion with federal tax dollars. But there is a real possibility that the Court could narrow or even overrule Flast.

If that happens, then there would be no way to sue to stop the federal government from giving any form of assistance to churches, synagogues, mosques, or other religious entities. The Establishment Clause could be ignored by the federal government and no one could stop it.

This possibility reaffirms the importance of our nations's commitment to the seperation of church and state and our fight against the relgious right's war on this American principle.

Answer 1

That's a crock of you know what. And people will be suing. They have no right to force anything on anybody. That's unconstitutional. But then again Bush is known to break laws. I hope he gets caught for all of his lies.

Answer 2

We could only wish that religious schools could get government funding. Has anyone noticed the state of education in public schools? Hello!!! I am a liberal. I was raised Catholic and went to public school from 4th grade up. I've had my child in public school where she was surrounded by inadequate teachers and programs. I have her in a Catholic school for a better education. and THIS is the reason behind these cases. People want their children to get a better education and if this means they have to add a little faith in their life (which is much needed in society) then so be it. If there's something my child is taught that I feel the need to elaborate on, I do. My child will grow up and decide on her own religion regardless of what she was taught. That's what I did. But she sure is getting a better education. Teachers who aren't complaining about their wages and treating their students like cattle.

Answer 3

Well argued, but I support Bush's position in this regard.

I also believe that I should be able to use my school tax dollars to pay for private school.