During the oral argument, the Court wrestled with whether treating religion differently when it comes to government funding is unlawful discrimination. BJC’s brief noted that declining to fund religious education with taxpayer funds is a long-standing means of ensuring religious liberty.
In January, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear a case that asks whether a Montana state provision that bars the government from funding religious institutions unconstitutionally discriminates against religion by denying funding to religious institutions that is available to secular institutions.
The U.S. Supreme Court this week will consider arguments about the religious significance of the cross and whether a large memorial on publicly owned land in Maryland violates the Constitution.
In a statement opposing Project Blitz and similar legislative proposals, a coalition including the BJC decried recent efforts to use government institutions to promote a Christian perspective.
In a brief filed with the U.S. Supreme Court in the Bladensburg Cross case, the BJC counters powerfully the claim that the cross is merely a generic, secular memorializing symbol.