Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/16pdf/15-577_khlp.pdf
Page Number: 1.0

(Slip Opinion) 

OCTOBER  TERM,  2016 

1 

Syllabus 

NOTE:  Where  it  is  feasible,  a  syllabus  (headnote)  will  be  released,  as  is
being  done  in  connection  with  this  case,  at  the  time  the  opinion  is  issued.
The  syllabus  constitutes  no  part  of  the  opinion  of  the  Court  but  has  been
prepared  by  the  Reporter  of  Decisions  for  the  convenience  of  the  reader. 
See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337. 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

Syllabus 

TRINITY LUTHERAN CHURCH OF COLUMBIA, INC. v. 

COMER, DIRECTOR, MISSOURI DEPARTMENT OF 

NATURAL RESOURCES 

CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR 
THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT 

No. 15–577.  Argued April 19, 2017—Decided June 26, 2017 

The Trinity Lutheran Church Child Learning Center is a Missouri pre-
school  and  daycare  center.    Originally  established  as  a  nonprofit  or-
ganization,  the  Center  later  merged  with  Trinity  Lutheran  Church 
and now operates under its auspices on church property.  Among the
facilities at the Center is a playground, which has a coarse pea gravel
surface  beneath  much  of  the  play  equipment.    In  2012,  the  Center 
sought  to  replace  a  large  portion  of  the  pea  gravel  with  a  pour-in-
place  rubber  surface  by  participating  in  Missouri’s  Scrap  Tire  Pro-
gram.  The  program,  run  by  the  State’s  Department  of  Natural  Re-
sources,  offers  reimbursement  grants  to  qualifying  nonprofit  organi-
zations  that  install  playground  surfaces  made  from  recycled  tires.
The Department had a strict and express policy of denying grants to
any applicant owned or controlled by a church, sect, or other religious
entity.  Pursuant to that policy, the Department denied the Center’s 
application.    In  a  letter  rejecting  that  application,  the  Department 
explained that under Article I, Section 7 of the Missouri Constitution,
the  Department  could  not  provide  financial  assistance  directly  to  a 
church.  The Department ultimately awarded 14 grants as part of the 
2012 program.  Although the Center ranked fifth out of the 44 appli-
cants, it did not receive a grant because it is a church.

Trinity Lutheran sued in Federal District Court, alleging that the
Department’s failure to approve its application violated the Free Ex-
ercise Clause of the First Amendment.  The District Court dismissed 
the  suit.  The  Free  Exercise  Clause,  the  court  stated,  prohibits  the
government  from  outlawing  or  restricting  the  exercise  of  a  religious 
practice, but it generally does not prohibit withholding an affirmative