Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/19pdf/18-1195_g314.pdf
Page Number: 16.0

Cite as:  591 U. S. ____ (2020) 

13 

Opinion of the Court 

This  prohibition  prevented  Davey  from  using  his  scholar-
ship to obtain a degree that would have enabled him to be-
come a pastor.  We held that Washington had not violated 
the Free Exercise Clause. 

Locke differs from this case in two critical ways.  First, 
Locke  explained  that  Washington  had  “merely  chosen  not
to fund a distinct category of instruction”: the “essentially 
religious endeavor” of training a minister “to lead a congre-
gation.”  Id., at 721.  Thus, Davey “was denied a scholarship 
because  of what  he  proposed  to  do—use  the  funds  to  pre-
pare for the ministry.”  Trinity Lutheran, 582 U. S., at ___ 
(slip op., at 12).  Apart from that narrow restriction, Wash-
ington’s program allowed scholarships to be used at “perva-
sively religious schools” that incorporated religious instruc-
tion throughout their classes.  Locke, 540 U. S., at 724–725. 
By contrast, Montana’s Constitution does not zero in on any 
particular “essentially religious” course of instruction at a 
religious school.  Rather, as we have explained, the no-aid 
provision bars all aid to a religious school “simply because
of what it is,” putting the school to a choice between being
religious  or  receiving  government  benefits.  Trinity  Lu-
theran, 582 U. S., at ___ (slip op., at 12).  At the same time, 
the  provision  puts  families  to  a  choice  between  sending 
their children to a religious school or receiving such bene-
fits. 

Second, Locke invoked a “historic and substantial” state 
interest in not funding the training of clergy, 540 U. S., at 
725, explaining that “opposition to . . . funding ‘to support
church  leaders’  lay  at  the  historic  core  of  the  Religion
Clauses,” Trinity Lutheran, 582 U. S., at ___ (slip op., at 13) 
(quoting Locke, 540 U. S., at 722).  As evidence of that tra-
dition, the Court in Locke emphasized that the propriety of 
state-supported clergy was a central subject of founding-era 
debates,  and  that  most  state  constitutions  from  that  era 
prohibited  the  expenditure  of  tax  dollars  to  support  the
clergy.  See id., at 722–723.