Opinion ID: 2058058
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Locke v. Davey

Text: [¶ 36] In Locke, the Supreme Court again addressed application of the First Amendment to educational funding issues. The Court upheld a Washington State college scholarship program that prohibited the use of scholarship funds for pursuit of a devotional theology degree. 540 U.S. at 725, 124 S.Ct. 1307. The restriction was authorized by Washington's state constitution. [13] In upholding the restriction, the Court reaffirmed that `there is room for play in the joints' between the religion clauses. Id. at 718, 124 S.Ct. 1307 (quoting Walz v. Tax Comm'n, 397 U.S. 664, 669, 90 S.Ct. 1409, 25 L.Ed.2d 697 (1970)). By this, the Court meant that there are some state actions permitted by the Establishment Clause but not required by the Free Exercise Clause. Id. at 719, 124 S.Ct. 1307. [¶ 37] The Court in Locke indicated that Zelman stands for the proposition that under the Establishment Clause, the link between government funds and religious training is broken by the independent and private choice of recipients. Id. at 719, 124 S.Ct. 1307. Thus, the Court noted, if Washington State wished, it could, consistent with the Establishment Clause, permit scholarship recipients to pursue a degree in devotional theology. Id. The issue in Locke was whether Washington could deny such funding without violating the Free Exercise Clause. Id. The Court determined that it could. Id. at 725, 124 S.Ct. 1307. [¶ 38] Because the Court in Locke found no free exercise violation, it subjected the plaintiff's due process claim to rational basis scrutiny. Id. at 720 n. 3, 124 S.Ct. 1307. The Court noted that Washington State has a historic and substantial interest in not funding the pursuit of devotional degrees in order to avert the practice of state-sponsored clergy, a hallmark of established religion, which justified the limitation. Id. at 722, 725, 124 S.Ct. 1307. Thus, the Court upheld the scholarship limitation, concluding, [i]f any room exists between the two Religion Clauses, it must be here. Id. at 725, 124 S.Ct. 1307.