Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/19pdf/19-177_b97c.pdf
Page Number: 13.0

2 

AGENCY FOR INT’L DEVELOPMENT v. ALLIANCE FOR 
OPEN SOCIETY INT’L, INC. 
THOMAS, J., concurring 

to support the Government’s objectives with regard to those 
programs.  Ibid.  After all, the Constitution itself “impos[es] 
affirmative ideological commitments prerequisite to assist-
ing in the government’s work.”  Id., at 227.  It excludes view-
points  such  as  communism  and  anarchism,  stating  that
those engaged in government work must swear an oath to 
support our Constitution’s republican form of government. 
See Art. VI, cl. 3. 

Moreover, the mere conditioning of funds on “ ‘the affir-
mation of a belief’ ” tied to the purpose of a government pro-
gram involves “no compulsion at all.”  AOSI I, 570 U. S., at 
226 (Scalia, J., joined by THOMAS, J., dissenting).  Such a 
condition is “the reasonable price of admission to a limited 
government-spending  program  that  each  organization  re-
mains free to accept or reject.”  Ibid.  Just as respondents
are not compelled to associate with their foreign affiliates, 
see ante, at 6–8, they are not compelled to participate in the 
Leadership Act program. 

The  Policy  Requirement  does  not  violate  the  First
Amendment, regardless of whether it is applied to respond-
ents, respondents’ legally distinct foreign affiliates, or any
other organization, foreign or domestic.  Because the Court 
properly rejects respondents’ attempt to extend our errone-
ous precedent, I join its opinion in full.