|
|
Home :
Religion and Belief
:
Religion and Schools
Maine High Court Upholds School Tuition Program (4/26/2006)
FOR IMMEDIATE
RELEASE
CONTACT: media@aclu.orgMCLU Applauds
Decision Protecting Government-Free Religion
PORTLAND, ME -- In
a 6-to-1 decision, the Maine Supreme Court today ruled that the state is not
required to fund religious education with taxpayer money.
“The
Supreme Court’s decision today shows a deep appreciation for the First Amendment
and for our nation’s traditions,” said Main Civil Liberties Union Cooperating
Attorney Jeffrey Thaler. “The Maine Legislature’s decision not to fund
religious education is based on an awareness that government interference in
religion could lead to real problems.”
In writing for the majority
of the Court, Justice Donald Alexander found that state’s reasons for declining
to fund religious education—“excessive entanglement between religion and state”
and “concerns about maintaining diversity within the public schools, and
avoiding involvement in discrimination in admissions and hiring by religious
schools”—were all legitimate. The Court rejected the claim that the
state’s decision was motivated by hostility towards religion or religious
schools.
“The MCLU is opposed to government involvement in
religion,” said Zachary Heiden, MCLU Staff Attorney. “Religion is simply
too important to be needlessly entangled with the
government.”
Today’s decision, Anderson et al. v. Town of Durham et
al., upholds a Cumberland County Superior Court ruling, which found in favor of
the State of Maine and parents opposed to public funding of religious
education. In 2004, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
decided a nearly identical case in Eulitt et al. v. Maine Department of
Education. The MCLU submitted a friend-of-the-court brief in that case.
“Government-free religion remains a major priority for the Maine
Civil Liberties Union,” said Shenna Bellows, Executive Director of the
MCLU. “Religious institutions, such as private schools, currently enjoy a
great amount of independence from the government currently enjoy a great amount
of independence from the government.”
Heiden, of the MCLU, and Thaler, of Bernstein Shur, represented
the taxpayers who were defending Maine’s decision to stay out of the religion
business. Thaler played a key role in both of these cases and presented oral
argument on behalf of the interveners in Anderson.
|
|
|
