The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear St. Mary Catholic Parish v. Roy, a case challenging Colorado’s decision to exclude Catholic preschools from its state-funded Universal Preschool Program. The dispute centers on whether the state’s requirement that participating schools sign a nondiscrimination agreement regarding sexual orientation and gender identity imposes an undue burden on religious institutions.
Colorado launched the Universal Preschool Program in 2023, offering families up to $6,300 annually toward tuition at a private preschool of their choice. To participate, schools must agree to treat a child’s gender assertion as definitive, a policy the Catholic Church and other religious groups argue conflicts with their teachings on human sexuality. Lower courts, including the Tenth Circuit, previously upheld the state’s rule as a neutral law of general applicability.
What the Right Is Saying
Conservative legal advocates and the plaintiffs, including the Archdiocese of Denver and the Sheley family, argue that Colorado is discriminating against religious viewpoints by offering public funds only to schools that align with state-approved gender ideologies. They point to prior Supreme Court rulings, such as Trinity Lutheran v. Comer and Carson v. Makin, which held that states cannot exclude religious entities from generally available public benefits.
The plaintiffs note that Colorado’s program already contains categorical exemptions for low-income students and students with disabilities, arguing that the state’s refusal to grant a religious exemption is inconsistent. They contend that the requirement forces families to choose between their faith and state-supported education, effectively penalizing religious institutions. An anonymous father cited in reports stated that his family is excluded from education funding simply because he does not subscribe to the ideology of choosing a child’s gender.
What the Left Is Saying
Legal scholars and Democratic congressional leaders arguing on behalf of Colorado contend that the nondiscrimination requirement is a necessary standard to ensure equal access and safety for all children, including those who identify as LGBT. They argue that exempting religious schools would create bureaucratic inconsistencies and potentially harm the well-being of young children by invalidating their gender identities.
Supporters of the state’s position maintain that the law is neutral and generally applicable, similar to health and safety regulations like fire codes or immunization requirements. They assert that once a state provides public funds for private options, it must ensure those options do not discriminate against protected classes. A brief filed by legal experts suggests that four-year-olds already possess fragile identities that could be negatively impacted by teachings that do not affirm gender assertions.
What the Numbers Show
According to reports, Colorado’s policy has excluded approximately 1,500 children across 30 Catholic preschools from the state funding program. Enrollment at these Catholic preschools has decreased by one-fifth, and at least two institutions have closed. The Universal Preschool Program provides up to $6,300 per child per year, meaning families who opt for Catholic preschools must pay the full cost out of pocket or forgo the benefit.
The case traces its legal foundation to Employment Division v. Smith, the 1990 Supreme Court decision stating that neutral, generally applicable laws do not require special scrutiny when they burden religious exercise. However, subsequent rulings have narrowed the application of Smith in the context of public funding, establishing that religious neutrality in benefit distribution is a constitutional requirement.
The Bottom Line
The Supreme Court’s decision in St. Mary Catholic Parish v. Roy will clarify the limits of state authority when conditioning public funds on adherence to specific nondiscrimination policies regarding gender identity. The ruling will determine whether Colorado’s program violates the Free Exercise Clause by treating religious schools differently from secular counterparts that receive the same state subsidies.
This case follows a series of Supreme Court decisions that have ruled against Colorado in previous disputes involving religious objectors, including Masterpiece Cakeshop, 303 Creative, and Chiles v. Salazar. The outcome will impact how other states structure voucher and scholarship programs, particularly regarding the intersection of LGBTQ+ nondiscrimination laws and religious liberty protections.