‘Catholics Need Not Apply’: Supreme Court Hears Case Over Colorado’s LGBTQ Rules

The conservative majority on the Supreme Court appears skeptical of a Colorado policy that blocks Catholic preschools from taking part in a taxpayer funded program if they decline to enroll families with gay and transgender parents or children. A lawyer for a group suing over the policy, Nicholas Reaves, calls it a “Catholics need not apply” program.Under Colorado’s universal preschool program, the state pays for up to 15 hours of preschool per week, but the school has to agree to sign a nondiscrimination agreement to be eligible to receive the funding.The Archdiocese of Denver, two Catholic parishes with preschools, and two parents sued over the policy. In St. Mary Catholic Parish v. Roy, the archdiocese argues the state’s requirement runs counter to the religious mission of the schools. It also claims it is violating the First Amendment rights of the church and its members.The archdiocese appealed to the Supreme Court after a district court and the United States Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit ruled for the state. The lower courts came to the conclusion that the state “did not exclude” religious preschools from the program, saying the schools opted out on their own. The lower courts cited a 1990 Supreme Court decision that the state’s rules were neutral and applied to every preschool equally. The plaintiffs argue that the lower courts relied on the wrong case law.The lawyer for the plaintiffs, Nicholas Reaves, told the justices that Colorado allows more than 1,000 schools to turn away students for other reasons. Some schools can prioritize low-income families or children with disabilities for admission. Mr. Reaves said that Colorado has used “inconsistent and contradictory” arguments to defend its position.Justice Brett Kavanaugh asked, “There are definitely lots of Catholic schools with children who have parents in same-sex marriages, gay teachers, gay coaches, gay athletic directors, gay students, is that true? Of what relevance is that as we think about the issue here?”“Your honor, I don’t doubt that’s true,” Mr. Reaves responded. “At the end of the day it’s a question for the archbishop in Denver to decide on the religious teaching and I think every diocese can make their own decision about where exactly that line is.”There are Catholic-run schools that are part of Colorado’s program. When asked why the archdiocese run Catholic Charities agreed to the nondiscrimination policy, Mr. Reaves said the charity has a different mission than parish schools.A wide ranging collection of religious groups filed briefs in support of the archdiocese and the Trump administration also argued on behalf of the plaintiffs.Justice Amy Coney Barrett asked what the difference was between explicitly excluding religious schools or knowing that a policy will effectively exclude them from taking part in it.The attorney for Colorado, deputy solicitor Helen Norton, said the program rules hold all schools to the same standards, and religious schools are free to teach about their beliefs while receiving public funding as long as they don’t discriminate in enrollment.The court’s conservative majority has ruled in favor of religious plaintiffs in several cases over the past several years, and it has also allowed taxpayer dollars to flow to religious groups. In this case the justices will have to decide how the court’s 2022 decision in Carson v. Makin applies. In that case the justices struck down a Maine law that blocked funding for schools that provide religious instruction while allowing public funding to be used at other private schools.Southern Baptist Convention lawyer Zack Pruitt listened to the arguments and believes the justices were leaning toward relying, in part, on the Carson ruling. That would likely hand the archdiocese a win in the case and another setback for Colorado in a religious freedom case. In an 8 to 1 March decision the justices halted Colorado’s ban on conversion therapy — aimed at changing a young person’s sexual orientation — calling it unconstitutional. Colorado has lost two other recent cases in front of the Supreme Court.“The Supreme Court has made clear three times in the past decade that religious Americans don’t have to surrender their faith to receive public benefits,” Mr. Reaves told reporters outside the court after oral arguments. “It’s time for the court to hand Colorado another well-deserved loss,” he added.The justices are expected to issue a decision in the case by the end of June.

‘Catholics Need Not Apply’: Supreme Court Hears Case Over Colorado’s LGBTQ Rules

‘Catholics Need Not Apply’: Supreme Court Hears Case Over Colorado’s LGBTQ Rules

More from the New York Sun

Researchers Find Real TDS: Trump Dream Syndrome

The Eight Races in the East To Watch Early in the Night

More Than Half of Active-Duty Service Members Say Military Is Being Politicized, Making Them Want To Leave Early: Poll

Supreme Court Sends a Midterm Message

Eligibility Chaos Leaves Opening Night and Future of College Basketball in Legal Limbo

Has ‘Fake’ Alaska Senate Candidate ‘Disappeared’ Amid FBI Recruitment Probe?

Trump DOJ Moves To Muzzle Jack Smith, Blocking His Testimony in $10 Billion BBC Lawsuit

Melania Trump To Host Russian, Ukrainian Officials Together at White House

More from the New York Sun

Researchers Find Real TDS: Trump Dream Syndrome

The Eight Races in the East To Watch Early in the Night

More Than Half of Active-Duty Service Members Say Military Is Being Politicized, Making Them Want To Leave Early: Poll

Supreme Court Sends a Midterm Message

Eligibility Chaos Leaves Opening Night and Future of College Basketball in Legal Limbo

Has ‘Fake’ Alaska Senate Candidate ‘Disappeared’ Amid FBI Recruitment Probe?

Trump DOJ Moves To Muzzle Jack Smith, Blocking His Testimony in $10 Billion BBC Lawsuit

Melania Trump To Host Russian, Ukrainian Officials Together at White House