The Supreme Court / Scholarships and Vouchers
As The First Ammendment Center reports, the Supreme Court is discussing a case where a scholarship was refused to a student by the State of Washington because the student wanted to pursue a major of theology.
The Ninth Circuit court, which riled up many over their attack on the Pledge of Allegiance's use of 'under God' decided in favor of the student, illustrating that the court isn't a bunch of atheists opposed to all religious expression, as some have claimed. There are actually some complex issues at hand.
The Supreme Court appears to be worrying that siding with the Ninth Circuit in this case, and saying the State is *required* to fund religious education with scholarships, would require all government agencies to fund religion. (From elementary and secondary school vouchers, to welfare, on down the line)
The Supreme Court has already declared that states *can* fund religious institutions with school vouchers, but some fear this case could open a floodgate in the wall of separation.
Most analysts seem to suggest the court is looking for a way to make a narrow decision in favor of the student. The main difference that jumps out at me when looking at this case - between the scholarship and vouchers, and between the scholarship and most government programs - is that this student earned the scholarship on merit. It was not need-based.
Most government programs that provide money directly to individuals are either for everyone or based on economic need. But here we have a case of an individual who earned an award for academic achievement. And was then rejected for his religious pursuits. That seems to me unfair. A scholarship is an award for past achievements, and should be awarded regardless of where the awardee plans to utilize it.
