Carson v. Makin
View Official PDFBelow are plain-language sections to help you understand what the Court decided in Carson v. Makin and why it matters. Quotes are taken from the syllabus (the Court’s short summary at the start of the opinion).
Summary
A short, plain-English overview of Carson v. Makin.
The Supreme Court ruled that Maine's exclusion of religious schools from its tuition assistance program violates the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment. The Court determined that the program discriminates against religious schools by disqualifying them from receiving public benefits solely due to their religious character. The decision emphasized that once a state provides public funds for private education, it cannot exclude schools based on their religious nature.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in Carson v. Makin.
The Court held that Maine's 'nonsectarian' requirement for tuition assistance payments violates the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment.
Constitutional Concepts
These are the Constitution-related themes that appear in Carson v. Makin. Click a concept to see other cases that involve the same idea.
-
Why Free Exercise of Religion is relevant to Carson v. Makin
The Court held that Maine's exclusion of religious schools from its tuition assistance program violated the Free Exercise Clause.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Held: Maine's 'nonsectarian' requirement for otherwise generally available tuition assistance payments violates the Free Exercise Clause.
-
Why Establishment of Religion is relevant to Carson v. Makin
The Court discussed the Establishment Clause in relation to Maine's interest in separating church and state.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Maine's decision to continue excluding religious schools from its tuition assistance program after Zelman thus promotes stricter separation of church and state than the Federal Constitution requires.
-
Why Equal Protection is relevant to Carson v. Makin
Petitioners alleged that the 'nonsectarian' requirement violated the Equal Protection Clause, although the decision focused more on Free Exercise.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Petitioners sued the commissioner...alleging that the 'nonsectarian' requirement violated...the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Key Quotes
Short excerpts from the syllabus in Carson v. Makin that support the summary and concepts above.
Maine's 'nonsectarian' requirement for otherwise generally available tuition assistance payments violates the Free Exercise Clause.
A State need not subsidize private education, but once a State decides to do so, it cannot disqualify some private schools solely because they are religious.
The Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment protects against 'indirect coercion or penalties on the free exercise of religion, not just outright prohibitions.'