Supreme Court strikes down Maine law preventing state funds going to religious schools

Contributing sentiments towards policy:

61% : ""The essential promise of the First Amendment's religion clause is to guarantee religious freedom in the United States by requiring government neutrality toward religion," he said.
56% :Diament added that the ruling advanced religious liberty for all faiths.
54% : In the years since the earlier challenges upheld the state's policy, the Supreme Court ruled on two cases that also dealt with state funding of religious institutions.
52% : In 2020, when ruling on Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue, the court ruled that states that subsidize private schools cannot exclude schools for being religious.
50% : "Maine's 'nonsectarian' requirement for its otherwise generally available tuition assistance payments violates the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment," Roberts wrote in his opinion.
46% : Writing for the 6-3 majority in Carson v. Makin, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that the state's policy of paying for tuition in certain private schools as long as they do not have religious instruction is discrimination against religion.
46% :Agudath Israel of America, which represents the haredi Orthodox community whose members largely send their children to private religious schools, also filed a friend of the court brief and wrote in a news release that it, too, was pleased by the decision.
45% : "As Reform Jews, we value religious education but believe public money should stay in public schools.

*Our bias meter rating uses data science including sentiment analysis, machine learning and our proprietary algorithm for determining biases in news articles. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral. The rating is an independent analysis and is not affiliated nor sponsored by the news source or any other organization.