arizona
christian
school
tuition
organization
winn
et
argued
november
decided
april
respondents
arizona
taxpayers
sued
petitioner
director
state
department
revenue
challenging
rev
stat
ann
establishment
clause
grounds
arizona
law
gives
tax
credits
contributions
school
tuition
organizations
stos
use
contributions
provide
scholarships
students
attending
private
schools
including
religious
schools
petitioner
arizona
christian
school
tuition
organization
others
later
intervened
district
dismissed
suit
failure
state
claim
reversing
ninth
circuit
held
respondents
standing
taxpayers
flast
cohen
stated
establishment
clause
claim
held
respondents
challenge
tax
credit
opposed
governmental
expenditure
lack
article
iii
standing
flast
cohen
supra
pp
article
iii
vests
federal
judiciary
power
resolve
cases
controversies
language
limits
federal
judiciary
traditional
role
courts
redressing
injuries
resulting
specific
legal
dispute
obtain
ruling
merits
federal
plaintiff
must
assert
generalized
interest
citizens
constitutional
governance
schlesinger
reservists
comm
stop
war
instead
plaintiff
must
establish
standing
requires
fact
causal
connection
injury
conduct
complained
conclusion
opposed
merely
injury
favorable
decision
lujan
defenders
wildlife
pp
general
mere
fact
someone
taxpayer
provide
standing
seek
relief
federal
typical
assertion
taxpayer
standing
rests
unjustifiable
economic
political
speculation
see
frothingham
mellon
doremus
board
ed
hawthorne
government
expends
resources
declines
impose
tax
budget
necessarily
suffer
even
assuming
state
coffers
depleted
finding
injury
require
speculate
elected
officials
increase
tax
bill
make
deficit
daimlerchrysler
cuno
find
redressability
must
assume
taxpayers
remedy
allowed
legislators
pass
along
supposed
increased
revenue
form
tax
reductions
ibid
conclusions
apply
present
cases
costs
education
may
significant
portion
arizona
annual
budget
tax
credit
facilitating
operation
religious
secular
private
schools
relieve
burden
public
schools
provide
cost
savings
state
even
tax
credit
adverse
effect
arizona
budget
causation
redressability
problems
remain
find
particular
injury
fact
require
speculation
arizona
lawmakers
react
revenue
shortfalls
increasing
respondents
tax
liability
causation
finding
depend
additional
assumption
tax
increase
traceable
sto
tax
credit
respondents
established
injunction
credit
application
prompt
arizona
legislators
pass
along
increased
revenue
tax
reductions
ibid
pp
respondents
suit
fall
within
narrow
exception
rule
taxpayer
standing
established
flast
cohen
supra
federal
taxpayers
standing
mount
establishment
clause
challenge
federal
statute
providing
general
treasury
funds
support
inter
alia
textbook
purchases
religious
schools
standing
flast
taxpayers
must
show
logical
link
plaintiff
taxpayer
status
type
legislative
enactment
attacked
nexus
taxpayer
status
precise
nature
constitutional
infringement
alleged
considering
two
requirements
together
flast
explained
individuals
suffer
particular
injury
violation
establishment
clause
means
taxing
spending
power
property
transferred
government
treasury
sectarian
entity
taxpayer
allegation
cases
tax
money
extracted
spent
violation
specific
constitutional
protections
abuses
legislative
power
sto
tax
credit
visit
injury
identified
flast
government
spends
funds
general
treasury
dissenting
taxpayers
know
made
contribute
establishment
violation
conscience
contrast
tax
credit
allows
dissenting
taxpayers
use
funds
accordance
consciences
sto
tax
credit
extrac
spen
conscientious
dissenter
funds
service
establishment
citizen
sectarian
organization
rather
taxpayers
free
pay
tax
bills
without
contributing
sto
contribute
religious
secular
sto
choice
contribute
charitable
organizations
sto
tax
credit
tantamount
religious
tax
respondents
alleged
injury
standing
purposes
furthermore
respondents
satisfy
requirements
causation
redressability
government
collects
spends
taxpayer
money
governmental
choices
responsible
transfer
wealth
resulting
subsidy
religious
activity
flast
traceable
government
expenditures
injunction
expenditures
address
objections
conscience
contrast
contributions
result
decisions
private
taxpayers
regarding
funds
private
citizens
create
private
stos
stos
choose
beneficiary
schools
taxpayers
contribute
stos
injury
objectors
may
suffer
fairly
traceable
government
injunction
likely
reduce
contributions
stos
remedy
affect
noncontributing
taxpayers
tax
payments
pp
respondents
contrary
position
arizonans
benefiting
tax
credit
effect
paying
state
income
tax
stos
assumes
income
government
property
even
come
tax
collector
hands
premise
finds
basis
standing
jurisprudence
sometimes
reached
merits
establishment
clause
cases
involving
tax
benefits
opposed
governmental
expenditures
see
mueller
allen
nyquist
mauclet
hunt
mcnair
walz
tax
city
new
york
cases
mention
standing
stand
proposition
jurisdictional
defects
existed
moreover
far
clear
nonbinding
sub
silentio
standing
determinations
cases
depended
flast
ways
establishing
standing
establishment
clause
cases
involving
tax
benefits
pp
reversed
kennedy
delivered
opinion
roberts
scalia
thomas
alito
joined
scalia
filed
concurring
opinion
thomas
joined
kagan
filed
dissenting
opinion
ginsburg
breyer
sotomayor
joined
arizona
christian
school
tuition
organization
petitioner
kathleen
winn
et
al
gale
garriott
director
arizona
department
revenue
petitioner
kathleen
winn
et
al
writs
certiorari
appeals
ninth
circuit
april
justice
kennedy
delivered
opinion
arizona
provides
tax
credits
contributions
school
tuition
organizations
stos
stos
use
contributions
provide
scholarships
students
attending
private
schools
many
religious
respondents
group
arizona
taxpayers
challenge
sto
tax
credit
violation
establishment
clause
principles
first
fourteenth
amendments
arizona
rejected
similar
establishment
clause
claim
merits
respondents
sought
intervention
federal
judiciary
obtain
determination
merits
federal
parties
seeking
relief
must
show
standing
article
iii
constitution
standing
establishment
clause
cases
may
shown
various
ways
plaintiffs
may
demonstrate
standing
based
direct
harm
claimed
establishment
religion
mandatory
prayer
public
school
classroom
see
school
dist
abington
township
schempp
plaintiffs
may
demonstrate
standing
ground
incurred
cost
denied
benefit
account
religion
costs
benefits
result
alleged
discrimination
tax
code
availability
tax
exemption
conditioned
religious
affiliation
see
texas
monthly
bullock
plurality
opinion
part
respondents
contend
standing
challenge
arizona
sto
tax
credit
one
one
reason
arizona
taxpayers
mere
fact
plaintiff
taxpayer
generally
deemed
sufficient
establish
standing
federal
overcome
rule
respondents
must
rely
exception
created
flast
cohen
reasons
discussed
respondents
take
advantage
flast
narrow
exception
general
rule
taxpayer
standing
consequence
respondents
lacked
standing
commence
action
suit
must
dismissed
want
jurisdiction
respondents
challenged
provision
arizona
tax
code
see
sess
laws
codified
amended
rev
stat
ann
west
supp
section
allows
arizona
taxpayers
obtain
tax
credits
per
person
per
married
couple
contributions
stos
credit
exceeds
individual
tax
liability
credit
unused
portion
carried
forward
five
years
version
effect
pendency
lawsuit
charitable
organization
deemed
sto
upon
certain
conditions
see
west
organization
required
exempt
federal
taxation
internal
revenue
code
west
supp
limit
scholarships
students
attending
one
school
ibid
allocate
least
ninety
per
cent
annual
revenue
educational
scholarships
tuition
grants
children
attending
qualified
schools
ibid
qualified
school
turn
defined
part
private
school
arizona
discriminate
basis
race
color
handicap
familial
status
national
origin
earlier
lawsuit
filed
state
arizona
taxpayers
challenged
invoking
constitution
arizona
constitution
arizona
rejected
taxpayers
claims
merits
kotterman
killian
denied
certiorari
rhodes
killian
kotterman
killian
present
action
filed
district
district
arizona
named
director
arizona
department
revenue
defendant
arizona
taxpayers
brought
suit
claimed
violates
establishment
clause
first
amendment
incorporated
fourteenth
amendment
respondents
alleged
allows
stos
use
state
revenues
pay
tuition
students
religious
schools
discriminate
basis
religion
selecting
students
complaint
app
pet
cert
pp
respondents
requested
among
forms
relief
injunction
issuance
tax
credits
contributions
religious
stos
district
dismissed
respondents
suit
jurisdictionally
barred
tax
injunction
act
appeals
reversed
agreed
appeals
affirmed
hibbs
winn
remand
arizona
christian
school
tuition
organization
interested
parties
intervened
district
dismissed
respondents
suit
time
failure
state
claim
appeals
reversed
held
respondents
standing
flast
cohen
supra
reaching
merits
appeals
ruled
respondents
stated
claim
violated
establishment
clause
first
amendment
full
appeals
denied
en
banc
review
eight
judges
dissenting
granted
certiorari
ii
concept
operation
separation
powers
national
government
principal
foundation
first
three
articles
constitution
article
iii
federal
judiciary
vested
power
resolve
questions
issues
cases
controversies
language
restricts
federal
judicial
power
traditional
role
courts
summers
earth
island
institute
slip
english
legal
tradition
need
redress
injury
resulting
specific
dispute
taught
efficacy
judicial
resolution
gave
legitimacy
judicial
decrees
importance
resolving
specific
cases
visible
example
incremental
approach
common
law
equity
consideration
exceptional
circumstances
framers
paid
heed
lessons
see
art
iii
judicial
power
shall
extend
cases
law
equity
rules
consistent
longstanding
practices
courts
plaintiff
seeks
invoke
federal
judicial
power
must
assert
generalized
interest
citizens
constitutional
governance
schlesinger
reservists
comm
stop
war
continued
adherence
requirement
article
iii
maintains
public
confidence
unelected
restrained
federal
judiciary
judicial
power
extended
every
question
constitution
chief
justice
marshall
explained
federal
courts
might
take
possession
almost
every
subject
proper
legislative
discussion
decision
papers
john
marshall
cullen
ed
quoted
daimlerchrysler
cuno
legislative
executive
departments
federal
government
less
judicial
department
duty
defend
constitution
see
art
vi
cl
shared
obligation
incompatible
suggestion
federal
courts
might
wield
unconditioned
authority
determine
constitutionality
legislative
executive
acts
valley
forge
christian
college
americans
separation
church
state
federal
courts
decide
questions
law
arising
outside
cases
controversies
inimical
constitution
democratic
character
resulting
conflict
judicial
political
branches
long
run
beneficial
either
richardson
powell
concurring
instructed
chief
justice
marshall
admonition
takes
care
observe
role
assigned
judiciary
within
constitution
tripartite
allocation
power
valley
forge
supra
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
iii
state
case
controversy
article
iii
plaintiff
must
establish
standing
allen
wright
minimum
constitutional
requirements
standing
explained
lujan
defenders
wildlife
first
plaintiff
must
suffered
fact
invasion
legally
protected
interest
concrete
particularized
imminent
conjectural
hypothetical
second
must
causal
connection
injury
conduct
complained
injury
trace
able
challenged
action
defendant
th
result
independent
action
third
party
third
must
opposed
merely
injury
favorable
decision
citations
omitted
requiring
particular
injury
meant
injury
must
affect
plaintiff
personal
individual
way
question
whether
respondents
plaintiffs
trial
satisfy
requisite
elements
standing
respondents
suggest
status
arizona
taxpayers
provides
standing
challenge
sto
tax
credit
absent
special
circumstances
however
standing
based
plaintiff
mere
status
taxpayer
rejected
general
proposition
individual
paid
taxes
continuing
legally
cognizable
interest
ensuring
funds
used
government
way
violates
constitution
hein
freedom
religion
foundation
plurality
opinion
precept
referred
rule
taxpayer
standing
doctrinal
basis
rule
discussed
frothingham
mellon
decided
massachusetts
mellon
alleged
certain
federal
expenditures
excess
congressional
authority
constitution
plaintiff
argued
standing
raise
claim
interest
government
treasury
allegedly
unconstitutional
expenditure
government
funds
affect
personal
tax
liability
rejected
arguments
effect
upon
future
taxation
payment
funds
remote
fluctuating
uncertain
give
rise
case
controversy
interest
moneys
treasury
recognized
necessarily
shared
millions
others
ibid
consequence
frothingham
held
presented
judicial
controversy
appropriate
resolution
federal
rather
matter
public
concern
pursued
political
process
second
pertinent
case
doremus
board
ed
hawthorne
considered
frothingham
prohibition
taxpayer
standing
connection
alleged
establishment
clause
violation
new
jersey
statute
provided
public
school
teachers
read
bible
verses
students
start
schoolday
plaintiff
sought
law
enjoined
asserting
standing
based
status
taxpayer
writing
justice
jackson
reiterated
foundational
role
article
iii
standing
plays
separation
party
invokes
power
federal
courts
must
able
show
statute
invalid
sustained
immediately
danger
sustaining
direct
injury
result
enforcement
merely
suffers
indefinite
way
common
people
generally
doremus
supra
quoting
frothingham
supra
plaintiff
doremus
lacked
direct
particular
financial
interest
suit
result
decision
merits
merely
advisory
followed
plaintiff
allegations
give
rise
case
controversy
subject
judicial
resolution
article
iii
ibid
cf
school
dist
abington
township
schempp
finding
standing
state
laws
required
bible
readings
prayer
public
schools
plaintiffs
state
taxpayers
children
enrolled
public
schools
directly
affected
challenged
laws
holdings
consistent
frothingham
doremus
recent
decisions
explained
claims
taxpayer
standing
rest
unjustifiable
economic
political
speculation
government
expends
resources
declines
impose
tax
budget
necessarily
suffer
contrary
purpose
many
governmental
expenditures
tax
benefits
spur
economic
activity
turn
increases
government
revenues
daimlerchrysler
difficulties
persist
even
one
assumes
expenditure
tax
benefit
depletes
government
coffers
find
injury
must
speculate
elected
officials
increase
tax
bill
make
deficit
ibid
find
redressability
must
assume
remedy
taxpayers
seek
allowed
legislators
pass
along
supposed
increased
revenue
form
tax
reductions
ibid
pure
speculation
conclude
injunction
government
expenditure
tax
benefit
result
actual
tax
relief
asarco
kadish
opinion
kennedy
principles
apply
present
cases
respondents
may
right
arizona
sto
tax
credits
estimated
annual
value
million
see
brief
respondent
winn
et
al
see
also
arizona
dept
revenue
revenue
impact
arizona
tax
expenditures
fy
preliminary
reporting
total
estimated
value
sto
tax
credits
claimed
period
education
young
people
course
one
state
principal
missions
responsibilities
consequent
costs
make
significant
portion
state
budget
however
beginning
analysis
helping
students
obtain
scholarships
private
schools
religious
secular
sto
program
might
relieve
burden
placed
arizona
public
schools
result
immediate
permanent
cost
savings
state
see
brief
petitioner
arizona
christian
school
tuition
organization
discussing
studies
indicating
sto
program
may
net
save
state
money
see
also
mueller
allen
educating
substantial
number
students
private
schools
relieve
public
schools
correspondingly
great
burden
benefit
taxpayers
underscoring
potential
financial
benefits
sto
program
average
value
sto
scholarship
may
far
less
average
cost
educating
arizona
public
school
student
see
brief
petitioner
garriott
encourages
scholarships
attendance
private
schools
sto
tax
credit
may
cause
state
incur
financial
loss
even
assuming
sto
tax
credit
adverse
effect
arizona
annual
budget
problems
remain
conclude
particular
injury
fact
require
speculation
arizona
lawmakers
react
revenue
shortfalls
increasing
respondents
tax
liability
daimlerchrysler
finding
causation
depend
additional
determination
tax
increase
traceable
sto
tax
credits
distinct
governmental
expenditures
tax
benefits
respondents
established
injunction
application
sto
tax
credit
prompt
arizona
legislators
pass
along
supposed
increased
revenue
form
tax
reductions
ibid
matters
conjectural
inferential
steps
show
causation
redressability
depends
premises
remains
considerable
doubt
taxpayers
shown
interest
protecting
state
treasury
advanced
even
show
closer
link
interest
still
general
character
particular
certain
persons
taxpayers
shown
higher
taxes
result
tuition
credit
scheme
rule
taxpayer
standing
rule
designed
avoid
speculation
insist
particular
injury
applies
respondents
lawsuit
taxpayers
must
rely
exception
rule
exception
next
considered
primary
contention
respondents
course
despite
general
rule
taxpayers
lack
standing
object
expenditures
alleged
unconstitutional
suit
falls
within
exception
established
flast
cohen
must
noted
outset
explained
flast
holding
provides
narrow
exception
general
rule
taxpayer
standing
bowen
kendrick
issue
flast
standing
federal
taxpayers
object
first
amendment
grounds
congressional
statute
allowed
expenditures
federal
funds
general
treasury
support
among
programs
instruction
reading
arithmetic
subjects
religious
schools
purchase
textbooks
instructional
materials
use
schools
flast
held
taxpayers
standing
two
conditions
met
first
condition
must
logical
link
plaintiff
taxpayer
status
type
legislative
enactment
attacked
condition
satisfied
doremus
statute
challenged
case
providing
recitation
bible
passages
public
schools
involved
incidental
expenditure
tax
funds
flast
flast
contrast
allegation
federal
government
violated
establishment
clause
exercise
legislative
authority
collect
spend
tax
dollars
decades
since
flast
careful
enforce
requirement
see
hein
standing
flast
challenge
federal
executive
actions
funded
general
appropriations
valley
forge
standing
flast
challenge
agency
decision
transfer
parcel
federal
property
pursuant
property
clause
second
condition
standing
flast
must
nexus
plaintiff
taxpayer
status
precise
nature
constitutional
infringement
alleged
condition
deemed
satisfied
flast
based
allegation
government
funds
spent
outlay
religion
contravention
establishment
clause
frothingham
contrast
claim
congress
exceeded
constitutional
authority
without
regard
specific
prohibition
confirming
flast
turned
unique
features
establishment
clause
violations
declined
lower
taxpayer
standing
bar
suits
alleging
violations
constitutional
provision
apart
establishment
clause
hein
supra
plurality
opinion
see
also
richardson
statement
account
clause
schlesinger
incompatibility
clause
stating
two
conditions
taxpayer
standing
flast
considered
together
explaining
individuals
suffer
particular
injury
standing
purposes
violation
establishment
clause
means
taxing
spending
power
property
transferred
government
treasury
sectarian
entity
flast
put
taxpayer
allegation
cases
tax
money
extracted
spent
violation
specific
constitutional
protections
abuses
legislative
power
flast
thus
understood
alleged
establishment
clause
challenges
federal
spending
ion
spen
ding
money
aid
religion
alleged
plaintiff
daimlerchrysler
quoting
flast
injury
flast
continued
unlike
generalized
grievances
conduct
government
appropriate
judicial
redress
flast
found
support
finding
personal
injury
history
establishment
clause
particularly
james
madison
memorial
remonstrance
religious
assessments
daimlerchrysler
supra
general
assembly
commonwealth
virginia
considered
tax
levy
support
teachers
christian
religion
flast
supra
see
bill
establishing
provision
teachers
christian
religion
reprinted
everson
board
ed
ewing
supplemental
appendix
dissent
rutledge
proposed
assessment
bill
taxpayers
direct
payments
christian
societies
choosing
ibid
taxpayer
made
choice
general
assembly
divert
funds
seminaries
learning
least
undoubtedly
religious
character
rosenberger
rector
visitors
univ
souter
dissenting
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
see
also
thomas
concurring
however
seminaries
provision
might
functioned
practice
critics
took
position
proposed
bill
threatened
compulsory
religious
contributions
see
buckley
church
state
revolutionary
virginia
pp
eckenrode
separation
church
state
virginia
memorial
remonstrance
madison
objected
proposed
assessment
ground
coerce
form
religious
devotion
violation
conscience
madison
view
government
citizen
contribute
three
pence
property
support
one
establishment
flast
supra
quoting
writings
james
madison
hunt
ed
madisonian
prohibition
depend
amount
property
conscripted
sectarian
ends
taking
even
one
amounting
three
pence
violates
conscience
cf
supra
proposed
bill
ultimately
died
committee
general
assembly
instead
enacted
legislation
forbidding
compelled
support
religion
see
bill
establishing
religious
freedom
reprinted
papers
thomas
jefferson
boyd
ed
see
also
flast
madison
went
become
flast
put
leading
architect
religion
clauses
first
amendment
flast
thus
informed
specific
evils
identified
public
arguments
drafted
establishment
clause
fought
adoption
see
also
feldman
intellectual
origins
establishment
clause
rev
framers
generation
worried
conscience
violated
citizens
required
pay
taxes
support
religious
institutions
whose
beliefs
disagreed
mcconnell
coercion
lost
element
establishment
wm
mary
rev
respondents
contend
principles
demonstrate
standing
challenge
sto
tax
credit
view
tax
credit
flast
purposes
best
understood
governmental
expenditure
incorrect
easy
see
tax
credits
governmental
expenditures
similar
economic
consequences
least
beneficiaries
whose
tax
liability
sufficiently
large
take
full
advantage
credit
yet
tax
credits
governmental
expenditures
implicate
individual
taxpayers
sectarian
activities
dissenter
whose
tax
dollars
extracted
spent
knows
small
measure
made
contribute
establishment
violation
conscience
flast
supra
instance
taxpayer
direct
particular
connection
establishment
depend
economic
speculation
political
conjecture
connection
exist
even
conscientious
dissenter
tax
liability
unaffected
reduced
see
daimlerchrysler
supra
government
declines
impose
tax
contrast
connection
dissenting
taxpayer
alleged
establishment
financial
injury
remains
speculative
see
supra
awarding
citizens
tax
credit
allows
citizens
retain
control
funds
accordance
consciences
distinction
governmental
expenditures
tax
credits
refutes
respondents
assertion
standing
arizona
taxpayers
choose
contribute
stos
spend
money
money
state
collected
respondents
taxpayers
arizona
extrac
spen
conscientious
dissenter
funds
service
establishment
flast
citizen
contribute
three
pence
sectarian
organization
quoting
writings
james
madison
supra
contrary
respondents
arizona
taxpayers
remain
free
pay
tax
bills
without
contributing
sto
respondents
likewise
able
contribute
sto
choice
either
religious
secular
respondents
also
option
contributing
charitable
organizations
case
respondents
may
become
eligible
tax
deduction
different
tax
credit
see
rev
stat
ann
west
supp
sto
tax
credit
tantamount
religious
tax
tithe
visit
injury
identified
flast
follows
respondents
neither
alleged
injury
standing
purposes
general
rules
met
flast
exception
finding
standing
circumstances
extension
flast
limits
logic
hein
plurality
opinion
departure
flast
stated
rationale
furthermore
respondents
satisfy
requirements
causation
redressability
government
collects
spends
taxpayer
money
governmental
choices
responsible
transfer
wealth
case
resulting
subsidy
religious
activity
purposes
flast
traceable
government
expenditures
injunction
expenditures
address
objections
conscience
raised
see
daimlerchrysler
contrast
contributions
result
decisions
private
taxpayers
regarding
funds
private
citizens
create
private
stos
stos
choose
beneficiary
schools
taxpayers
contribute
stos
state
outset
affords
opportunity
create
contribute
sto
tax
credit
system
implemented
private
action
state
intervention
objecting
taxpayers
know
fellow
citizens
state
decide
contribute
fact
make
contribution
considerations
prevent
injury
objectors
may
suffer
fairly
traceable
government
injunction
application
tax
credit
likely
reduce
contributions
stos
remedy
affect
noncontributing
taxpayers
tax
payments
result
injury
suffered
respondents
remedied
injunction
limiting
tax
credit
operation
resisting
conclusion
respondents
suggest
arizonans
benefit
tax
credits
effect
paying
state
income
tax
stos
respondents
view
tax
credits
give
rise
standing
even
tax
deductions
since
former
yield
reduction
final
tax
liability
see
brief
respondent
winn
et
al
tr
oral
arg
matters
flast
whether
sectarian
stos
receive
government
funds
drawn
general
tax
revenues
moneys
extracted
citizen
handed
religious
institution
violation
citizen
conscience
inquiry
respondents
argument
fails
like
contributions
lead
charitable
tax
deductions
contributions
yielding
sto
tax
credits
owed
state
fact
pass
directly
taxpayers
private
organizations
respondents
contrary
position
assumes
income
treated
government
property
even
come
tax
collector
hands
premise
finds
basis
standing
jurisprudence
private
bank
accounts
equated
arizona
state
treasury
conclusion
flast
exception
inapplicable
first
may
seem
tension
several
earlier
cases
addressing
establishment
clause
issues
decided
flast
see
mueller
nyquist
mauclet
hunt
mcnair
walz
tax
city
new
york
cf
hibbs
winn
reaching
threshold
jurisdictional
issues
cases
mention
standing
contrary
conclusion
reached
potential
jurisdictional
defect
neither
noted
discussed
federal
decision
decision
stand
proposition
defect
existed
see
hagans
lavine
hen
questions
jurisdiction
passed
prior
decisions
sub
silentio
never
considered
bound
subsequent
case
finally
brings
jurisdictional
issue
us
tucker
truck
lines
even
judicial
power
jurisdiction
followed
lead
chief
justice
marshall
held
bound
prior
exercise
jurisdiction
case
questioned
passed
sub
silentio
frothingham
surpa
risk
error
relied
assumptions
gone
unstated
unexamined
furthermore
law
practice
including
tax
credit
disadvantages
particular
religious
group
particular
nonreligious
group
disadvantaged
party
rely
flast
obtain
redress
resulting
injury
see
texas
monthly
bullock
plurality
opinion
finding
standing
general
interest
magazine
sought
recover
tax
payments
ground
religious
periodicals
exempt
tax
standing
establishment
clause
cases
shown
various
ways
far
clear
nonbinding
sub
silentio
holdings
cases
respondents
cite
depended
flast
see
walz
supra
explaining
plaintiff
owner
real
estate
new
york
city
objected
city
issuance
property
tax
exemptions
religious
organizations
plaintiffs
cases
advanced
arguments
jurisdiction
independent
flast
makes
particularly
inappropriate
determine
whether
standing
found
issue
left
unexplored
establishment
religion
alleged
cause
real
injury
particular
individuals
federal
courts
may
adjudicate
matter
like
constitutional
provisions
establishment
clause
acquires
substance
meaning
explained
elaborated
enforced
context
actual
disputes
reality
underlies
requirement
requirement
satisfied
exercises
judicial
power
likely
undermine
public
confidence
neutrality
integrity
judiciary
one
casts
role
council
revision
conferring
power
invalidate
laws
behest
anyone
disagrees
era
frequent
litigation
class
actions
sweeping
injunctions
prospective
effect
continuing
jurisdiction
enforce
judicial
remedies
courts
must
careful
insist
formal
rules
standing
less
making
article
iii
standing
inquiry
necessary
significant
implications
constitutional
litigation
result
rules
wide
applicability
beyond
congress
power
change
present
suit
serves
illustration
principles
fact
respondents
state
taxpayers
give
standing
challenge
subsidies
allegedly
provides
religious
stos
alter
rules
standing
weaken
requisite
elements
inconsistent
limitation
federal
jurisdiction
imposed
article
iii
judgment
appeals
reversed
ordered
arizona
christian
school
tuition
organization
petitioner
kathleen
winn
et
al
gale
garriott
director
arizona
department
revenue
petitioner
kathleen
winn
et
al
writs
certiorari
appeals
ninth
circuit
april
justice
scalia
justice
thomas
joins
concurring
taxpayers
ordinarily
standing
challenge
federal
state
expenditures
allegedly
violate
constitution
see
daimlerchrysler
cuno
flast
cohen
created
narrow
exception
taxpayers
raising
establishment
clause
challenges
government
expenditures
today
majority
dissent
struggle
whether
respondents
challenge
arizona
tuition
tax
credit
falls
within
narrow
exception
principled
reading
article
iii
struggles
unnecessary
flast
anomaly
jurisprudence
irreconcilable
article
iii
restrictions
federal
judicial
power
opinions
established
repudiate
misguided
decision
enforce
constitution
see
hein
freedom
religion
foundation
scalia
concurring
judgment
nevertheless
join
opinion
finds
respondents
lack
standing
applying
flast
rather
distinguishing
away
unprincipled
grounds
cf
hein
supra
arizona
christian
school
tuition
organization
petitioner
kathleen
winn
et
al
gale
garriott
director
arizona
department
revenue
petitioner
kathleen
winn
et
al
writs
certiorari
appeals
ninth
circuit
april
justice
kagan
justice
ginsburg
justice
breyer
justice
sotomayor
join
dissenting
since
inception
arizona
tax
credit
cost
state
estimate
nearly
million
diverted
tax
revenue
arizona
taxpayers
instituted
suit
collectively
plaintiffs
allege
use
funds
subsidize
school
tuition
organizations
stos
breaches
establishment
clause
promise
religious
neutrality
many
stos
plaintiffs
claim
discriminate
basis
child
religion
awarding
scholarships
almost
half
century
litigants
like
plaintiffs
obtained
judicial
review
claims
government
used
taxing
spending
power
violation
establishment
clause
beginning
flast
cohen
continuing
case
case
four
decades
others
exercised
jurisdiction
decide
challenges
materially
different
one
every
suit
succeeded
merits
every
day
contest
government
financing
religious
activity
today
breaks
precedent
refusing
hear
taxpayers
claims
government
unconstitutionally
subsidized
religion
tax
system
litigants
lack
standing
majority
holds
funding
religion
challenge
comes
tax
credit
rather
appropriation
tax
credit
asserts
injure
objecting
taxpayers
extract
spend
funds
service
establishment
ante
internal
quotation
marks
alterations
omitted
novel
distinction
standing
law
appropriations
tax
expenditures
little
basis
principle
precedent
cash
grants
targeted
tax
breaks
means
accomplishing
government
objective
provide
financial
support
select
individuals
organizations
taxpayers
oppose
state
aid
religion
equal
reason
protest
whether
aid
flows
one
form
subsidy
either
way
government
financed
religious
activity
either
way
taxpayers
able
challenge
subsidy
still
worse
arbitrary
distinction
threatens
eliminate
occasions
taxpayer
contest
government
monetary
support
religion
precisely
appropriations
tax
breaks
achieve
identical
objectives
government
easily
substitute
one
today
opinion
thus
enables
government
flast
guarantee
access
judiciary
government
need
follow
one
simple
rule
subsidize
tax
system
preclude
taxpayer
challenges
state
funding
religion
result
effective
demise
taxpayer
standing
diminish
establishment
clause
force
meaning
sometimes
one
taxpayers
suffered
injury
necessary
challenge
government
sponsorship
religion
today
holding
therefore
prevent
federal
courts
determining
whether
subsidies
sectarian
organizations
comport
constitution
guarantee
religious
neutrality
believe
challenges
warrant
consideration
merits
respectfully
dissent
decision
majority
recounts
held
paying
taxes
usually
give
individual
article
iii
standing
challenge
government
action
ante
taxpayers
demonstrate
requisite
injury
person
interest
moneys
treasury
comparatively
minute
indeterminable
frothingham
mellon
decided
massachusetts
mellon
given
size
complexity
government
budgets
fiction
contend
unlawful
expenditure
causes
individual
measurable
economic
harm
hein
freedom
religion
foundation
plurality
opinion
taxpayers
ordinary
case
establish
causation
disputed
government
measure
affects
tax
burden
redressability
judicial
remedy
result
tax
reductions
ante
points
agree
disagreement
concerns
relevance
case
general
prohibition
taxpayer
standing
resolved
basis
case
instead
exception
rule
principle
established
decades
ago
flast
taxpayers
may
challenge
certain
government
actions
alleged
violate
establishment
clause
plaintiffs
standing
suit
meets
flast
requirements
fair
reading
decision
taxpayers
standing
flast
held
allege
statute
enacted
pursuant
legislature
taxing
spending
power
violates
establishment
clause
situation
explained
plaintiff
establish
nexus
taxpayer
status
asserted
claim
sought
adjudicated
first
challenging
legislative
action
taken
taxing
spending
clause
taxpayer
shows
logical
link
status
type
enactment
attacked
ibid
second
invoking
establishment
clause
specific
limitation
legislature
taxing
spending
power
taxpayer
demonstrates
nexus
status
precise
nature
constitutional
infringement
alleged
ibid
connections
flast
held
taxpayers
alleging
government
using
tax
proceeds
aid
religion
necessary
stake
outcome
litigation
satisfy
article
iii
ibid
proper
appropriate
part
ies
indeed
often
possible
parties
seek
judicial
enforcement
constitution
guarantee
religious
neutrality
ibid
simple
restatement
flast
standard
enough
establish
plaintiffs
standing
attack
provision
arizona
tax
code
legislature
enacted
pursuant
state
constitution
taxing
spending
clause
flast
nexus
part
allege
provision
violates
establishment
clause
flast
nexus
part
satisfying
flast
conditions
plaintiffs
demonstrated
stake
taxpayers
enforcing
constitutional
restraints
provision
aid
stos
ibid
indeed
connection
case
taxpayer
status
asserted
claim
sought
adjudicated
tighter
noted
previously
addressed
different
issue
lawsuit
plaintiffs
invoke
establishment
clause
challenge
integral
part
state
tax
statute
reflected
state
tax
forms
part
calculus
necessary
determine
tax
liability
hibbs
winn
winn
kennedy
dissenting
emphasis
added
finding
standing
merely
matter
applying
flast
therefore
affirm
appeals
determination
questioned
even
eight
judges
called
rehearing
en
banc
merits
plaintiffs
pursue
claim
federal
ii
majority
reaches
contrary
decision
distinguishing
two
methods
financing
religion
taxpayer
standing
challenge
state
subsidies
religion
announces
mechanism
used
appropriation
mechanism
targeted
tax
break
otherwise
called
tax
expenditure
former
case
latter
declares
taxpayer
suffers
cognizable
injury
ante
distinction
finds
support
case
law
little
reason
decades
since
flast
one
differentiated
appropriations
tax
expenditures
deciding
whether
litigants
standing
courts
including
one
faced
establishment
clause
challenges
tax
credits
deductions
exemptions
courts
reached
merits
claims
simple
reason
taxpayers
experience
injury
standing
purposes
whether
government
subsidization
religion
takes
form
cash
grant
tax
measure
rationale
majority
offers
newfound
distinction
grants
tax
expenditures
somehow
come
complaining
taxpayer
wallet
bear
weight
places
flast
still
good
law
majority
today
says
nothing
contrary
plaintiffs
able
pursue
claim
merits
today
never
much
hinted
litigants
shoes
plaintiffs
lack
standing
flast
contrary
faced
identical
situation
five
times
including
prior
incarnation
case
five
times
resolved
suit
without
questioning
plaintiffs
standing
lower
federal
courts
followed
example
handled
matter
way
count
separate
cases
involving
appellate
district
courts
adjudicated
taxpayer
challenges
tax
expenditures
alleged
violate
establishment
suspect
missed
found
instance
dismissing
claim
lack
standing
consider
five
cases
entertained
suits
filed
taxpayers
alleging
tax
expenditures
unlawfully
subsidized
religion
first
took
challenge
walz
tax
city
new
york
upheld
constitutionality
property
tax
exemption
religious
organizations
next
hunt
mcnair
decided
establishment
clause
permitted
state
agency
issue
bonds
sectarian
institutions
day
committee
public
ed
religious
liberty
nyquist
struck
state
tax
deduction
parents
paid
tuition
religious
private
schools
decade
later
mueller
allen
considered
time
rejected
similar
establishment
clause
challenge
state
tax
deduction
expenses
incurred
attending
schools
recently
decided
preliminary
issue
case
ruling
tax
injunction
act
posed
barrier
plaintiffs
litigation
establishment
clause
claim
see
winn
five
cases
divided
sharply
merits
disputes
one
respect
justices
unanimous
single
one
thought
question
litigants
standing
solicitor
general
participating
amicus
curiae
conceded
oral
argument
federal
government
view
taxpayer
standing
five
cases
dismissed
lack
jurisdiction
right
without
authority
decide
walz
nyquist
hunt
mueller
hibbs
winn
case
years
ago
solicitor
general
right
answer
yes
want
make
sure
heard
answer
said
answer
yes
words
agree
cases
wrongly
decided
ou
said
standing
cases
solicitor
general
taxpayer
standing
tr
oral
arg
solicitor
general
answered
differently
suits
described
alleged
state
tax
expenditure
violated
establishment
clause
relied
taxpayer
standing
basis
today
speculates
plaintiffs
cases
advanced
arguments
jurisdiction
independent
flast
ante
whatever
fact
one
understood
basis
standing
five
cases
every
federal
independent
obligation
consider
standing
even
parties
call
question
see
dallas
anything
else
risk
unlawful
exercise
judicial
authority
cases
additional
prompt
several
amici
including
contested
least
raised
question
plaintiffs
standing
taxpayers
pursue
moreover
well
aware
time
issues
presented
taxpayer
standing
decided
three
cases
within
year
elaborating
general
bar
taxpayer
suits
see
richardson
schlesinger
reservists
comm
stop
war
fourth
held
bar
applicable
different
kind
establishment
clause
claim
see
valley
forge
christian
college
americans
separation
church
state
indeed
decisions
face
reflect
recognition
gave
plaintiffs
standing
specifically
described
plaintiffs
taxpayers
challenged
use
tax
system
fund
religious
activities
see
winn
mueller
nyquist
hunt
walz
short
considered
decided
cases
thought
taxpayer
standing
existed
majority
shrugs
decisions
discuss
taken
obvious
ante
previously
stressed
disregard
implications
exercise
judicial
authority
assumed
proper
years
brown
shoe
see
bowen
kendrick
finding
standing
partly
deciding
similar
cases
questioned
standing
taxpayer
plaintiffs
raise
establishment
clause
challenges
bank
deveaux
cranch
marshall
prior
decisions
exercising
discussing
jurisdiction
much
weight
show
jurisdictional
flaw
neither
occurred
bar
bench
principle
extra
force
relied
decisions
support
jurisdiction
cases
pause
moment
decisions
majority
today
easily
dismisses
featured
prior
cases
exemplars
jurisdiction
school
dist
grand
rapids
ball
relied
nyquist
hunt
conclude
taxpayers
standing
challenge
program
aid
religious
private
schools
overruled
part
grounds
agostini
felton
winn
recall
earlier
iteration
case
rejected
different
jurisdictional
objection
part
relying
mueller
nyquist
called
cases
adjudications
great
moment
discerning
jurisdictional
barrier
warned
written
reflecting
nothing
unexamined
custom
unthinking
habit
internal
quotation
marks
citations
omitted
today
majority
write
adjudications
reaches
result
precedent
taxpayer
standing
cases
declined
distinguish
appropriations
tax
expenditures
simple
reason
many
contexts
distinction
one
search
difference
begin
see
consider
example
far
afield
flast
indeed
religion
imagine
federal
government
decides
pay
hundreds
billions
dollars
insolvent
banks
midst
financial
crisis
suppose
many
millions
taxpayers
oppose
bailout
ground
whether
right
wrong
immaterial
uses
money
reward
irresponsible
business
behavior
face
hostility
members
congress
make
following
proposal
rather
give
money
banks
via
appropriations
government
allow
banks
subtract
exact
amount
tax
bill
otherwise
pay
treasury
proposal
calm
furor
taxpayers
respond
saying
subsidy
subsidy
bailout
bailout
whether
accomplished
one
means
surely
latter
indeed
think
less
countrymen
failed
see
cynical
proposal
ordinary
people
appreciate
case
law
also
recognizes
targeted
tax
breaks
often
economically
functionally
indistinguishable
direct
monetary
subsidy
rosenberger
rector
visitors
univ
thomas
concurring
tax
credits
deductions
exemptions
provided
individual
organization
much
effect
cash
grant
recipient
amount
tax
pay
absent
tax
break
regan
taxation
representation
opinions
therefore
long
recognized
reality
tax
expenditures
form
subsidy
administered
tax
system
arkansas
writers
project
ragland
scalia
dissenting
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
tax
breaks
viewed
form
government
spending
camps
town
harrison
even
assuming
diverted
tax
funds
pass
public
treasury
special
tax
benefits
cash
grants
represen
charge
made
upon
state
nyquist
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
deplete
funds
government
coffers
transferring
money
select
reason
government
budgeting
rules
routinely
insist
calculation
tax
subsidies
addition
appropriations
president
must
provide
information
estimated
cost
tax
expenditures
budget
submits
congress
year
see
supra
similarly
congressional
budget
committees
must
report
members
level
tax
expenditures
federal
budget
see
many
including
arizona
likewise
compute
impact
targeted
tax
breaks
public
treasury
recognition
measures
spending
different
name
see
supra
arizona
department
revenue
must
issue
annual
report
detailing
approximate
costs
lost
revenue
state
tax
expenditures
rev
stat
ann
west
recent
report
notes
significance
accounting
budget
process
explains
fiscal
impact
implementing
targeted
tax
breaks
including
sto
credit
challenged
similar
direct
expenditure
state
funds
arizona
dept
revenue
revenue
impact
arizona
tax
expenditures
fy
preliminary
see
also
surrey
tax
incentives
device
implementing
government
policy
comparison
direct
government
expenditures
harv
rev
dollar
dollar
person
receives
government
pays
whether
dollar
comes
tax
credit
label
direct
expenditure
label
financing
mechanisms
result
bottom
line
taxpayers
challenging
allege
harm
prior
cases
often
recognized
cost
targeted
tax
breaks
impose
taxpayers
generally
government
grants
exemptions
allows
deductions
observed
taxpayers
affected
fact
exemption
deduction
means
taxpayers
said
indirect
vicarious
bob
jones
univ
every
tax
exemption
constitutes
subsidy
affects
nonqualifying
taxpayers
forcing
bear
cost
texas
monthly
bullock
plurality
opinion
indeed
specifically
compared
harm
arising
tax
subsidy
arising
cash
grant
declared
injuries
equivalent
kinds
support
deplete
public
fisc
either
case
stated
alleged
injury
based
asserted
effect
allegedly
illegal
activity
public
revenues
taxpayer
contributes
daimlerchrysler
cuno
taxpayer
injury
course
fails
establish
standing
case
whatever
form
state
aid
takes
see
ante
supra
key
whenever
taxpayers
standing
flast
challenge
appropriation
also
standing
contest
tax
expenditure
access
federal
courts
depend
type
financial
subsidy
state
offered
consider
examples
point
time
concerning
state
funding
religion
suppose
state
desires
reward
jews
say
per
year
religious
devotion
nature
taxpayers
concern
vary
state
allows
jews
claim
aid
tax
returns
lieu
receiving
annual
stipend
assume
state
wishes
subsidize
ownership
crucifixes
purchase
religious
symbols
bulk
distribute
takers
mail
reimbursement
check
individual
buys
submits
receipt
purchase
authorize
person
claim
tax
credit
equal
price
paid
really
taxpayers
less
reason
complain
state
selects
last
three
options
today
says
wrong
effect
form
subsidy
public
fisc
contribute
regardless
mechanism
state
uses
taxpayers
identical
stake
ensuring
state
exercise
taxing
spending
power
complies
mechanism
arizona
selected
tax
credit
aid
school
tuition
organizations
year
come
april
state
tells
arizonans
either
pay
full
amount
tax
liability
state
subtract
tax
bill
contributing
sum
sto
see
winn
claim
credit
individual
makes
notation
tax
return
splits
tax
payment
two
checks
one
made
state
sto
recognized
winn
sto
payment
therefore
costless
individual
ibid
comes
otherwise
legally
obligated
pay
state
hence
public
resources
stos
capitalize
aspect
tax
credit
worth
quite
lot
drum
support
stos
highlight
donations
made
individual
people
taxpayers
money
one
sto
advertises
ith
arizona
scholarship
tax
credit
send
children
community
religious
day
schools
wo
cost
dime
brief
respondents
internal
quotation
marks
emphasis
omitted
another
urges
potential
donors
imagine
giving
charity
someone
else
money
stop
imagining
thanks
arizona
tax
laws
internal
quotation
marks
emphasis
omitted
arizonans
good
fun
spend
people
money
state
reckoning
credit
cost
arizona
almost
million
redirected
tax
plaintiffs
contend
expenditure
violates
establishment
clause
legislature
appropriated
monies
stos
plaintiffs
standing
beyond
dispute
argue
merits
claim
federal
plaintiffs
recourse
today
holds
arizona
funds
stos
tax
credit
rather
cash
grant
less
hypothetical
examples
offered
form
prevails
substance
differences
make
difference
determine
access
judiciary
casualty
historic
vital
method
enforcing
constitution
guarantee
religious
neutrality
majority
offers
one
reason
distinguish
appropriations
tax
expenditures
taxpayer
experiences
injury
asserts
government
extracts
spends
tax
dollars
aid
religion
ante
internal
quotation
marks
alterations
omitted
words
taxpayer
suffers
legally
cognizable
harm
particular
tax
dollars
wind
religious
organization
coffers
see
also
tr
oral
arg
solicitor
general
proposing
key
point
placed
electronic
tag
track
monitor
cent
plaintiffs
pay
tax
none
goes
religious
stos
taxpayer
make
showing
concludes
government
subsidizes
religion
tax
credits
deductions
exemptions
rather
appropriations
majority
purports
rely
flast
support
new
extraction
requirement
plucks
three
words
extrac
spen
midst
flast
opinion
suggests
severely
constrict
decision
scope
ante
quoting
notes
flast
partly
relied
james
madison
famed
argument
memorial
remonstrance
religious
assessments
authority
force
citizen
contribute
three
pence
property
support
one
establishment
may
force
conform
establishment
cases
whatsoever
quoting
writings
james
madison
hunt
ed
see
ante
majority
come
indicated
earlier
everything
import
flast
cuts
majority
position
flast
stated
holding
hold
taxpayer
standing
consistent
article
iii
invoke
federal
judicial
power
alleges
congressional
action
taxing
spending
clause
derogation
establishment
clause
nothing
straightforward
sentence
supports
idea
taxpayer
challenge
legislative
action
disburses
particular
contribution
state
treasury
flast
primarily
justified
holding
ne
specific
evils
feared
drafted
establishment
clause
fought
adoption
taxing
spending
power
used
favor
one
religion
another
support
religion
general
evil
arises
even
specific
dollars
government
uses
come
citizens
object
preference
likewise
nexus
test
heart
flast
doctrinal
analysis
contains
hint
extraction
requirement
see
supra
finally
james
madison
provides
comfort
today
majority
referred
three
pence
exactly
even
meaningless
sum
money
today
core
injury
religious
establishment
naught
given
individual
loss
see
infra
discussing
madison
views
majority
left
nothing
save
three
words
flast
used
describe
particular
facts
case
single
respect
flast
recognize
handiwork
majority
depiction
injury
taxpayers
flast
perceived
arose
whenever
legislature
used
power
channel
tax
dollars
religious
activities
subsequent
cases
including
five
involving
tax
expenditures
taxpayer
pleaded
requisite
harm
stating
public
resources
funding
religion
tracing
particular
dollars
whether
solicitor
general
electronic
tag
means
enter
question
see
daimlerchrysler
describing
flast
understanding
establishment
clause
history
led
view
alleged
injury
expenditure
money
aid
religion
quoting
flast
reasons
already
given
standard
met
regardless
whether
funding
provided
via
cash
grant
tax
expenditure
see
supra
taxpayers
pick
cost
subsidy
either
form
see
ibid
taxpayers
interest
preventing
use
either
mechanism
infringe
religious
indeed
majority
new
conception
injury
odds
merely
flast
also
ironically
cases
precluding
taxpayer
standing
generally
see
supra
ante
today
majority
insists
legislation
challenged
establishment
clause
must
extrac
spen
conscientious
dissenter
funds
ante
rejected
taxpayer
standing
contexts
taxpayer
share
treasury
funds
minute
indeterminable
frothingham
taxpayer
point
expenditure
cash
grant
otherwise
say
tax
dollars
mix
fact
almost
surely
noted
complete
fiction
argue
unconstitutional
expenditure
causes
individual
taxpayer
measurable
economic
harm
hein
plurality
opinion
true
establishment
clause
cases
others
taxpayers
standing
cases
despite
foreseeable
failure
show
alleged
constitutional
violation
involves
tax
dollars
state
used
particular
funds
something
still
deeper
wrong
majority
extract
spend
requirement
measure
matters
establishment
clause
let
us
indulge
fiction
taxpayer
penny
somehow
involved
ordinary
appropriation
public
funds
religious
activity
thus
supposedly
distinguishing
tax
expenditure
still
consider
following
example
imagine
internal
revenue
service
places
checkbox
tax
returns
asking
filers
object
government
using
taxes
aid
religion
government
keeps
yes
money
separate
money
subsidizes
religious
activities
nonobjectors
account
majority
analysis
suggests
taxpayer
standing
allege
violation
establishment
clause
funds
used
extracted
citizen
handed
religious
institution
violation
citizen
conscience
ante
never
indicated
may
insulate
subsidies
religious
organizations
legal
challenge
eliciting
consent
taxpayers
course
right
take
approach
taxpayers
incur
harm
ability
bring
suit
whether
government
stores
tax
funds
one
bank
account
two
none
principles
underlying
establishment
clause
suggests
otherwise
james
madison
rightly
labels
leading
architect
religion
clauses
ante
quoting
flast
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
something
important
say
matter
extraction
majority
notes
madison
memorial
remonstrance
criticized
tax
levy
proposed
virginia
aid
teachers
christian
religion
ante
madison
passionate
opposition
proposal
informs
case
manner
different
majority
suggests
virginia
tax
fact
extracted
monies
even
three
pence
unwilling
citizens
requires
plan
allowed
conscientious
objectors
opt
subsidizing
religion
contributing
assessment
alternative
fund
construction
maintenance
county
see
bill
establishing
provision
teachers
christian
religion
reprinted
everson
board
ed
ewing
supplemental
appendix
dissent
rutledge
letter
james
madison
thomas
jefferson
reprinted
writings
james
madison
see
also
blasi
school
vouchers
religious
liberty
seven
questions
madison
memorial
remonstrance
cornell
rev
tax
provision
permitted
taxpayer
specify
christian
denomination
receive
payment
hose
wish
support
church
direct
assessment
proposed
common
school
fund
indeed
virginia
assessment
specifically
designed
avoid
charges
coercion
dissenters
pay
taxes
support
religious
teachings
disagreed
feldman
intellectual
origins
establishment
clause
rev
respect
virginia
assessment
like
arizona
tax
credit
although
funnel
tax
funds
religious
organizations
saddle
taxpayers
cost
neither
forces
given
taxpayer
pay
subsidy
pocket
madison
thought
feature
assessment
insufficient
save
relying
selfsame
aspect
arizona
scheme
deny
plaintiffs
claim
injury
majority
betrays
madison
vision
iii
today
decision
devastates
taxpayer
standing
establishment
clause
cases
government
often
uses
tax
expenditures
subsidize
favored
persons
activities
still
government
almost
always
option
appropriations
tax
subsidies
readily
interchangeable
cash
grant
today
tax
break
tomorrow
opinion
thus
offers
roadmap
truly
instruction
government
wishes
insulate
financing
religious
activity
legal
challenge
structure
funding
tax
expenditure
flast
stand
way
taxpayer
standing
object
however
blatantly
government
may
violate
establishment
clause
taxpayers
gain
access
federal
courts
ravaging
flast
way
today
decision
damages
one
nation
defining
constitutional
commitments
congress
shall
make
law
respecting
establishment
religion
ten
simple
words
stood
years
foundation
stone
american
religious
liberty
ten
words
long
understood
james
madison
limit
though
means
eliminate
government
power
finance
religious
activity
ruling
today
shield
state
subsidies
religion
review
notes
persons
alleging
establishment
clause
violations
suffered
individualized
injuries
therefore
standing
independent
taxpayer
status
see
ante
flast
arose
taxing
spending
power
may
used
favor
one
religion
another
support
religion
general
without
causing
particularized
harm
discrete
persons
arose
state
sponsorship
religion
sometimes
harms
individuals
small
matter
capacity
contributing
members
national
community
cases
flast
thought
constitution
guarantee
religious
neutrality
still
enforced
judgment
right
remains
right
today
respectfully
dissent
footnotes
together
garriott
director
arizona
department
revenue
winn
et
also
certiorari
footnotes
tax
expenditures
monetary
subsidies
government
bestows
particular
individuals
organizations
granting
preferential
tax
treatment
national
commission
fiscal
responsibility
reform
recently
referred
tax
breaks
various
deductions
credits
loopholes
spending
another
name
washington
post
see
also
defining
tax
expenditures
purposes
federal
government
budgetary
process
revenue
losses
attributable
provisions
tax
laws
allow
special
exclusion
exemption
deduction
gross
income
provide
special
credit
preferential
rate
tax
deferral
tax
liability
surrey
mcdaniel
tax
expenditures
explaining
tax
expenditures
represent
government
spending
favored
activities
groups
effected
tax
system
rather
direct
grants
loans
forms
government
assistance
see
johnson
economic
development
corporation
cty
oakland
supp
ed
steele
industrial
development
bd
metropolitan
govt
nashville
supp
md
christie
fed
appx
sd
apr
mueller
allen
supp
rhode
island
federation
teachers
norberg
supp
ri
public
funds
public
schools
byrne
supp
nj
freedom
religion
foundation
geithner
supp
ed
cal
gillam
harding
wl
ed
june
leverett
bur
hhs
civ
wl
june
luthens
bair
supp
sd
iowa
minnesota
civ
liberties
union
roemer
supp
kosydar
wolman
supp
sd
ohio
per
curiam
committee
public
ed
religious
liberty
nyquist
supp
sdny
ams
public
schools
franchise
tax
bd
nd
reprinted
app
juris
statement
franchise
tax
bd
cal
ams
public
schools
pp
also
several
times
summarily
affirmed
lower
decisions
adjudicating
taxpayer
challenges
tax
expenditures
alleged
violate
establishment
clause
see
byrne
public
funds
public
schools
summarily
holding
plaintiffs
taxpayers
standing
flast
challenge
tax
deduction
dependents
attending
religious
private
schools
grit
wolman
summarily
kosydar
wolman
supp
sd
ohio
noting
party
questioned
standing
taxpayers
contest
tax
credits
tuition
payments
franchise
tax
bd
cal
ams
public
schools
summarily
nd
invalidating
tax
credit
children
attending
private
schools
see
app
hibbs
winn
pp
complaint
pet
cert
mueller
allen
app
committee
public
ed
religious
liberty
nyquist
complaint
app
hunt
mcnair
complaint
app
walz
tax
city
new
york
pp
complaint
see
brief
amicus
curiae
mueller
allen
supra
brief
amicus
curiae
hibbs
winn
supra
brief
honorable
trent
franks
et
al
amici
curiae
hibbs
winn
supra
brief
catholic
conference
amicus
curiae
walz
tax
city
new
york
supra
majority
observes
special
tax
benefits
may
fact
increas
government
revenues
spur
ring
economic
activity
ante
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
may
long
run
although
effect
immediately
diminish
funds
public
treasury
majority
acknowledges
possibility
holds
true
appropriations
optimistically
refer
government
outlays
investments
insight
therefore
help
majority
distinguish
tax
expenditures
appropriations
majority
indicates
persons
challenge
hypothetical
government
actions
based
individualized
injury
separate
apart
taxpayer
status
see
ante
quite
right
indeed
parents
children
likely
standing
challenge
arizona
tax
credit
grounds
possibility
detract
point
made
purpose
illustrations
show
taxpayer
status
thing
alleged
confer
standing
irrespective
form
government
subsidy
see
arizona
dept
revenue
revenue
impact
arizona
tax
expenditures
fy
preliminary
fy
preliminary
fy
preliminary
fy
preliminary
fy
preliminary
fy
preliminary
june
fy
preliminary
fy
preliminary
mar
fy
preliminary
mar
fy
preliminary
july
fy
preliminary
even
taken
terms
majority
reasoning
justify
conclusion
plaintiffs
lack
standing
arizona
program
fact
necessitates
direct
expenditure
funds
state
treasury
statute
establishing
initiative
requires
arizona
department
revenue
certify
stos
maintain
sto
registry
make
registry
available
public
request
post
website
collect
annual
reports
filed
stos
send
written
notice
stos
failed
comply
statutory
requirements
rev
stat
ann
west
supp
presumably
activities
cost
money
comes
state
treasury
thus
majority
theory
government
extract
ed
spen
plaintiffs
along
taxpayers
dollars
implement
challenged
program
plaintiffs
standing
majority
makes
clear
nothing
analysis
hinges
size
proportion
plaintiffs
contribution
ante
applying
majority
theory
way
reveals
hollowness
core
anyone
believe
plaintiffs
suffered
injury
costs
involved
administering
program
far
greater
costs
granting
tax
expenditure
first
place
traditional
view
harm
taxpayers
arising
state
financing
religion
plaintiffs
satisfy
article
iii
injury
requirement
also
causation
redressability
requirements
majority
contrary
position
ante
stems
miscasting
injury
involved
harm
stated
correctly
rest
follows
wit
plaintiffs
allege
suffer
injury
state
funnels
public
resources
religious
organizations
tax
credit
arizona
claim
caused
injury
enacting
legislation
establishes
credit
injunction
limiting
credit
operation
redress
harm
preventing
allegedly
unlawful
diversion
tax
revenues
plaintiffs
need
majority
insists
show
remedy
affect
tax
payments
ante
taxpayer
flast
establish
tax
burden
decrease
absent
government
funding
religious
schools
previously
recognized
taxpayers
object
spending
tax
money
violation
establishment
clause
whether
tax
credits
appropriations
injunction
spending
redress
injury
regardless
whether
lawmakers
dispose
savings
way
benefit
personally
daimlerchrysler
cuno
provision
described
county
schools
seminaries
learning
bill
establishing
provision
teachers
christian
religion
reprinted
everson
board
ed
ewing
supplemental
appendix
dissent
rutledge
phrase
particular
religious
connotation
meant
schools
general
education
schools
training
ministers
berg
laycock
mistakes
locke
davey
future
state
payments
services
provided
religious
institutions
tulsa
rev
see
also
johnson
dictionary
english
language
seminary
means
place
education
whence
scholars
transplanted
life
majority
speculates
virginia
general
assembly
given
monies
collected
conscientious
objectors
schools
sectarian
bent
ante
assessment
never
became
law
one
know
county
schools
received
aid
indeed
first
schools
open
doors
decades
later
see
miller
first
liberty
see
generally
buck
development
public
schools
virginia
historians
legal
scholars
uniformly
understood
provision
considered
attempt
accommodate
taxpayers
want
tax
dollars
go
religion
see
berg
laycock
supra
provision
payment
school
fund
effort
support
religious
schools
part
support
education
overall
rather
effort
accommodate
possibility
taxpayers
buckley
church
state
revolutionary
virginia
text
proposed
bill
nonbelievers
forced
contribute
religion
assessment
carefully
drafted
permit
preferred
support
education
rather
religion
see
also
miller
supra
separation
religious
secular
foundational
challenge
first
amendment
theory
wm
mary
rev
adams
emmerich
heritage
religious
liberty
rev
laycock
nonpreferential
aid
religion
false
claim
original
intent
wm
mary
rev
pfeffer
church
state
freedom
rev
ed