Supreme Court to Review Religious Liberty Case: Catholic Preschool Challenges LGBTQ Admission Rules

The United States Supreme Court has made headlines once again by agreeing to hear a case involving religious liberty and LGBTQ rights, a legal issue that continues to engage large sectors of American society. The case in question, St. Mary Catholic Parish v. Roy, was accepted for review by the Court on Monday morning, and it will be a significant examination of the legal boundaries between religious freedoms and anti-discrimination laws.

The Catholic preschool involved is challenging its exclusion from Colorado’s “universal preschool” program. The preschool argues that this exclusion represents a form of religious discrimination, particularly because it is unable to receive an exemption from state rules that would require it to admit all students—regardless of their sexual orientation or the sexual orientation of their parents. These issues will primarily test the limits of the First Amendment in the context of a state-provided benefit.

Earlier, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit had rejected the preschool’s argument, determining that Colorado’s conditions were neutral and generally applicable to all preschools, irrespective of religious affiliation. This interpretation aligns with the Supreme Court’s 1990 decision in Employment Division v. Smith. Importantly, the Supreme Court has decided not to reconsider the merits of this established precedent in this case, while still agreeing to hear oral arguments.

With the Court showing interest in this legal conundrum, both sides of the aisle in the broader discourse on religious freedom and anti-discrimination laws eagerly anticipate the proceedings. Legal professionals should closely monitor this case as it could lead to important clarifications about the extent to which religious organizations can claim exemption from generally applicable anti-discrimination laws, potentially reshaping how states manage intersections between religious freedoms and inclusive educational practices. You can follow more details about the case and developments on SCOTUSblog.