Court Opinion

ID: 9688844
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 18:08:37.765814+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:18:42.592754
License: Public Domain

Yetka, Justice
(concurring specially).
Although the majority decision of this court is mandated by the recent opinions of the United States Supreme Court which apparently forbid any direct aid to nonpublic schools, I am compelled to state that there appears to be a sharp departure from past precedent.
It is difficult to perceive the distinction between striking down a tax credit allowed for sending a child to a nonpublic school when that school must follow a state-prescribed curriculum and where no part of the tax credit may be used for the teaching of religion-oriented subjects, and yet, on the other hand, upholding the constitutionality of granting tax-exempt status to churches, and, further, to allow an individual a tax deduction for contributions to his church. This case points out once again that while a strong philosophical argument could be made against all tax exemptions or deductions, this is a province that is better left to legislative determination, not to the courts.
If this recent trend of decisions by the United States Supreme *236Court continues to its logical conclusion, the decision of Walz v. Tax Commission, 397 U. S. 664, 90 S. Ct. 1409, 25 L. ed. 2d 697 (1970), appears in jeopardy.
I do not fear that the legislation at issue in the instant case would somehow foster the establishment of any religion. There is a distinction between actively supporting a religion or religions, and offering private education the chance to exist and to be available to all parents — poor or middle class, as well as the wealthy — who choose to exercise the right to send their children to nonpublic schools.
The strict scrutiny that legislation, such as that struck down today, must undergo appears fax beyond the degree of protection necessary to insure that our nation will be free from a “state religion” or religious persecution of its citizens. Rather, our legislature appears now to be barred from making any reasonable effort to insure that nonpublic education will survive except for the very wealthy. However, the highest court in our land has spoken, and this court and our legislature must adhere to its word.
Mr. Chief Justice Sheran, Mr. Justice Otis, Mr. Justice Rogosheske, and Mr. Justice MacLaughlin took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.