Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/19pdf/18-1195_g314.pdf
Page Number: 9.0

6 

ESPINOZA v. MONTANA DEPT. OF REVENUE 

Opinion of the Court 

the Department lacked authority to “transform” that defi-
nition  with  an  administrative  rule.    Id.,  at  468–469,  435 
P. 3d, at 614–615. 

Several Justices wrote separately.  All agreed that Rule 1
was invalid, but they expressed differing views on whether
the scholarship program was consistent with the Montana 
and United States Constitutions.  Justice Gustafson’s con-
currence  argued  that  the  program  violated  not  only  Mon-
tana’s no-aid provision but also the Federal Establishment 
and Free Exercise Clauses.  Id., at 475–479, 435 P. 3d, at 
619–621.  Justice Sandefur echoed the majority’s conclusion
that applying the no-aid provision was consistent with the 
Free Exercise Clause, and he dismissed the “modern juris-
prudence”  of  that  Clause  as  “unnecessarily  complicate[d]” 
due  to  “increasingly  value-driven  hairsplitting  and  over-
stretching.”  Id., at 482–484, 435 P. 3d, at 623–624. 

Two  Justices  dissented.  Justice  Rice  would  have  held 
that the scholarship program was permissible under the no-
aid  provision.  He  criticized  the  majority  for  invalidating 
the  program  “sua sponte,”  contending  that  no  party  had 
challenged it under the State Constitution.  Id., at 495, 435 
P. 3d,  at  631.    Justice  Baker  also  would  have  upheld  the 
program.  In her view, the no-aid provision did not bar the 
use  of  scholarships  at  religious  schools,  and  free  exercise 
concerns  could  arise  under  the  Federal  Constitution  if  it 
did.  Id., at 493–494, 435 P. 3d, at 630. 

We granted certiorari.  588 U. S. ___ (2019). 

II 
A 
The  Religion  Clauses  of  the  First  Amendment  provide
that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establish-
ment  of  religion,  or  prohibiting  the  free  exercise  thereof.”
We have recognized a “ ‘play in the joints’ between what the
Establishment  Clause  permits  and  the  Free  Exercise 
Clause  compels.”  Trinity  Lutheran  Church  of  Columbia,