Law Student Loses Supreme Court Case

In a 7-2 decision this week, the Supreme Court ruled against first-year Harvard Law School student Joshua D. Davey, finding that states are not required to include theology students in scholarship programs.

Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, writing for the majority, ruled Wednesday that the Promise Scholarship Program and the state of Washington’s constitution contain no “animus towards religion” and did not violate Davey’s rights.

Washington state rescinded Davey’s Promise Scholarship when he decided to major in theology as a student at Northwest College in Kirkland, Wash. Davey, now attending the Law School, sued the state on the grounds that this decision infringed upon his First Amendment right to worship freely.

According to Rehnquist, while states can extend existing scholarships to theology students, they have no constitutional obligation to do so.

“The state has merely chosen not to fund a distinct category of instruction,” he wrote.

Davey expressed disappointment about the court’s decision, viewing the its ruling as a missed opportunity for reform.

“I think the court in my case had an opportunity to do something that would really advance religious freedom and equality in this country, but they failed to do that,” he said.

The case, if Davey had won, could have provided additional legal support for government funding of programs at institutions with religious affiliations.

To Davey, the ruling was a product of broader attitudes about religion he has observed in society.

“I believe a fairly strong anti-religious bias exists in many of our institutions, both governmental and social, and this ruling was an example of that,” said Davey.

Similar sentiments were expressed by Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the dissent with Justice Clarence Thomas.

“But those singled out for disfavor can be forgiven for suspecting more invidious forces at work. Let there be no doubt: This case is about discrimination against a religious minority,” Scalia wrote.

“One need not delve too far into modern popular culture to perceive a trendy disdain for deep religious conviction,” he wrote later in the dissent.

Because of the court’s ruling, Davey will not recover any scholarship funds, but he said the money meant little to him.

“The decision yesterday increases my resolve even more to stand up for religious freedom and equality,” Davey said, adding that he now plans to encourage others to fight for the same ideals.

Davey said despite Wednesday’s ruling, he does not regret expending time and effort to get his case in front of the Supreme Court.

“I’d do it again,” he said.