Supreme Court decision blocks courthouse door for some 'faith-based' lawsuits

Is anyone surprised that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled today that ordinary taxpayers cannot challenge a White House initiative that helps religious groups get federal money?

In a 5-4 decision the Court has blocked a lawsuit by the Freedom From Religion Foundation, Inc., challenging the Bush Administration's use of taxpayer funds for conferences which instruct religious groups on how to apply for federal grants.

The majority opinion in Hein v. Freedom From Religion Foundation written by Justice Samuel Alito, appointed to the Court by President Bush, overturned a ruling that allowed the lawsuit to proceed. Bush's other high court appointee, Chief Justice John Roberts, also joined the ruling.

The Associated Press reports:

Taxpayers in the case "set out a parade of horribles that they claim could occur" unless the court stopped the Bush administration initiative, wrote Justice Samuel Alito. "Of course, none of these things has happened."

The justices' decision revolved around a 1968 Supreme Court ruling that enabled taxpayers to challenge government programs that promote religion.

The 1968 decision involved the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, which financed teaching and instructional materials in religious schools in low-income areas.
"This case falls outside" the narrow exception allowing such cases to proceed, Alito wrote.

In dissent, Justice David Souter said that the court should have allowed the taxpayer challenge to proceed.

The majority "closes the door on these taxpayers because the executive branch, and not the legislative branch, caused their injury," wrote Souter. "I see no basis for this distinction."

In a press release from Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Rev. Barry W. Lynn said:

"Most church-state lawsuits, including those that challenge congressional appropriations for faith-based programs, will not be affected," said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State

The outcome of the case before the Supreme Court was disappointing, Lynn said, because "taxpayers should be allowed to challenge public funding of religion, whether the money is allocated by Congress or the White House."

Did anyone really expect this Court to protect the Constitution?