540 U.S. 712 (2004).

One-Sentence Takeaway: The does not require states to fund religious instruction even when they fund comparable secular studies.

Summary: In Locke, the Supreme Court rejected a free exercise challenge to a Washington state law that barred state scholarship aid from being used for a devotional theology degree.

Although the law was not facially neutral with respect to religion, the Court held that it did not violate the Free Exercise Clause because it imposed neither criminal nor civil sanctions on any type of religious service or rite. It did not deny to ministers the right to participate in the political affairs of the community. And it did not require students to choose between their religious beliefs and receiving a government benefit. The State had merely chosen not to fund a distinct category of instruction.

jdjungle

Recent Posts

Assign

To transfer, make over or set over to another. To appoint, select, or designate for…

6 days ago

Assertive Conduct

Nonverbal conduct which is intended to be the equivalent of a spoken assertion.

6 days ago

Assault (Torts Law)

A person is liable for the intentional tort of "assault" if (1) he/she acts intending…

6 days ago

Assault (Criminal Law)

The creation in another of the fear of bodily harm. As the California Supreme Court…

6 days ago

Ybarra v. Spangard

25 Cal.2d 486 (1944) One-Sentence Takeaway: The California Supreme Court applied res ipsa loquitur to…

6 days ago

Wright v. Newman

266 Ga. 519, 467 S.E.2d 533 (1996). Facts: Kim Newman (P) sought child support from…

6 days ago