St. Mary’s Catholic Parish v. Roy is a religious liberty case before the Supreme Court challenging Colorado’s exclusion of faith-based schools from its universal preschool program under the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause.
Case Status
- Granted – pending oral arguments
ERLC Brief
- Amicus brief joined by ERLC
What is this case about?
In 2022, Colorado provided parents a “universal” preschool funding program for 15 hours of free preschool at any public or licensed private school. However, the program includes an “equal opportunity mandate,” a provision that Colorado is using to discriminate against religious private schools.
St. Mary’s Catholic Parish applied for a license, but was denied because they require employees and admitted families to affirm a biblical sexual ethic in regards to gender and sexuality. Colorado denied St. Mary’s an exemption from the mandate, even though their belief is a religious conviction.
Colorado was under no obligation to create a universal preschool program, but once it chose to do so, the Constitution barred the state from singling out religious schools and excluding them from a generally available public benefit.
The Supreme Court has ruled as such in three similar cases in the past six years. However, both the district and appellate courts ruled against the Denver archdiocese and the Catholic schools, finding the Colorado program to be neutral and generally applicable because the mandate applies to secular schools as well as religious schools. The Supreme Court established the neutral and generally applicable standard in its 1990 Employment Division v. Smith decision. The Supreme Court now has the opportunity to review this case and determine if Colorado can exclude religious schools from the state program using “religion neutral” language, when in practice the only schools affected are religious, creating implicit discrimination against them.
What is the question in the case?
Whether proving a lack of general applicability under Employment Division v. Smith requires showing unfettered discretion or categorical exemptions for identical secular conduct.
Whether Carson v. Makin displaces the rule of Employment Division v. Smith only when the government explicitly excludes religious people and institutions.
Why does it matter to Southern Baptists?
Southern Baptists are committed champions of religious liberty, ensuring believers can freely organize and express their faith without government interference. Furthermore, Southern Baptists oppose government efforts to discriminate against religious people because the government opposes their sincere religious beliefs. In the 2024 resolution “On Defending Religious Liberty,” Southern Baptists expressed they would like to “limit government infringement of religious expression.”
In this case, the Supreme Court has the opportunity to do just that by striking down its disastrous precedent in Employment Division v. Smith, which has been weaponized against people of faith to force them into compliance with state laws that burden their religious exercise. Overturning the Smith decision would be a significant victory for religious liberty protections and a necessary correction to our national precedent on religious exercise.
News about the case
Check back for news about the case.
