rosenberger university virginia argued march decided june respondent university virginia state instrumentality authorizes payments student activities fund saf outside contractors printing costs variety publications issued student groups called contracted independent organizations cios saf receives money mandatory student fees designed support broad range extracurricular student activities related university educational purpose cios must include dealings third parties written materials disclaimer stating independent university university responsible university withheld authorization payments printer behalf petitioners cio wide awake productions wap solely student newspaper wide awake christian perspective university virginia primarily promotes manifests particular belie deity ultimate reality prohibited university saf guidelines petitioners filed suit alleging inter alia refusal authorize payment violated first amendment right freedom speech district granted summary judgment university fourth circuit affirmed holding university invocation viewpoint discrimination deny payment violated speech clause concluding discrimination justified necessity complying establishment clause held guideline invoked deny saf support terms application petitioners denial right page ii free speech pp guideline violates principles governing speech limited public forums apply saf perry ed assn perry local educators determining whether state acting within power preserve limits set forum exclusion class speech legitimate see observed distinction one hand content discrimination discrimination speech subject matter may permissible preserves limited forum purposes hand viewpoint discrimination discrimination speaker specific motivating ideology opinion perspective presumed impermissible directed speech otherwise within forum limitations see recent apposite case area lamb chapel center moriches union free school held permitting school property used presentation views issue except dealing religious standpoint constitutes prohibited viewpoint discrimination case state actions properly interpreted unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination rather permissible based content terms saf prohibition university exclude religion subject matter selects disfavored treatment student journalistic efforts religious editorial viewpoints pp university attempt escape consequences lamb chapel urging case involves provision funds rather access facilities unavailing although may regulate content expression speaker enlists private entities convey message rust sullivan widmar vincent university may discriminate based viewpoint private persons whose speech subsidizes regan taxation representation argument scarcity public money may justify otherwise impermissible viewpoint discrimination among private speakers simply wrong pp vital first amendment speech principles stake guideline issue vast potential reach term promotes used comprehend writing advocating philosophic position rests upon belief nonbelief deity ultimate reality term manifests bring within prohibition writing resting upon premise presupposing existence nonexistence deity ultimate reality page iii difficult name renowned thinkers whose writings accepted save perhaps articles disclaiming connection ultimate philosophy pp violation following university denial saf support petitioners excused necessity complying establishment clause pp governmental program issue neutral toward religion neutrality significant factor upholding programs face establishment clause attack guarantee neutrality offended government follows neutral criteria policies extend benefits recipients whose ideologies viewpoints including religious ones broad diverse board ed kiryas joel grumet suggestion university created program advance religion aid religious cause saf purpose open forum speech support various student enterprises including publication newspapers recognition diversity creativity student life saf guidelines separate classification make payments behalf religious organizations wap seek subsidy christian editorial viewpoint sought funding guidielines student communications grou neutrality also apparent fact university taken pains disassociate private speech involved case program neutrality distinguishes student fees tax levied direct support church group churches violate establishment clause pp case controlled principle special establishment clause dangers exist government makes direct money payments sectarian institutions see roemer board public works since undisputed public funds flow directly wap coffers program issue public university violate establishment clause grants access facilities basis wide spectrum student groups even groups use facilities devotional exercises see widmar even upkeep maintenance repair facilities paid student activities fund students required contribute difference logic principle certainly difference constitutional significance using funds operate facility students access paying contractor operate facility behalf page iv involved university provides printing services broad spectrum student newspapers contrary view become law university avoid constitutional violation scrutinizing content student speech lest contain great religious message censorship far inconsistent establishment clause dictates governmental provision secular printing services basis pp kennedy delivered opinion rehnquist scalia thomas joined thomas filed concurring opinions souter filed dissenting opinion stevens ginsburg breyer joined rosenberger university virginia justice kennedy delivered opinion university virginia instrumentality commonwealth named thus bound first fourteenth amendments authorizes payment outside contractors printing costs variety student publications withheld authorization payments behalf petitioners sole reason student paper primarily promotes manifests particular belie deity ultimate reality paper promote manifest views within defined exclusion seems plain enough challenge university regulation denial authorization case raising issues speech establishment clauses first amendment rosenberger university virginia student group eligible submit bills outside contractors payment fund described must become contracted independent organization cio cio status available group majority whose members students whose managing officers fulltime students complies certain procedural requirements app pet cert cio must file constitution university must pledge discriminate membership must include dealings third parties written materials disclaimer stating cio independent university university responsible cio app cios enjoy access university facilities including meeting rooms computer terminals standard agreement signed cio university provides benefits opportunities afforded cios misinterpreted meaning organizations part controlled university university responsible organizations contracts acts omissions university approves organizations goals activities cios may exist operate university also entitled apply funds student activities fund saf established governed university guidelines purpose saf support broad range extracurricular student rosenberger university virginia activities related educational purpose university app pet cert saf based university recogni tion availability wide range opportunities students tends enhance university environment app guidelines require administered manner consistent educational purpose university well state federal law app pet cert saf receives money mandatory fee per semester assessed student student council elected students initial authority disburse funds actions subject review faculty body chaired designee vice president student affairs cf cios may submit disbursement requests saf guidelines recognize categories student groups may seek payment contractors related educational purpose university virginia one student news information opinion entertainment academic communications media groups guidelines also specify however costs certain activities cios otherwise eligible funding reimbursed saf student activities excluded saf support religious activities philanthropic contributions activities political activities activities jeopardize university tax exempt status involve payment honoraria similar fees social entertainment related expenses prohibition political activities defined limited electioneering lobbying guidelines provide hese restrictions funding political activities intended preclude funding otherwise eligible student organization espouses particular positions rosenberger university virginia ideological viewpoints including may unpopular generally accepted religious activity contrast defined activity primarily promotes manifests particular belie deity ultimate reality guidelines prescribe criteria determining amounts disbursements allowed behalf eligible student organization size group financial benefit activities organization seeks saf support must submit bills student council pays organization creditors upon determining expenses appropriate direct payments made student groups academic year student groups qualified cios one hundred applied support saf received funding fifteen groups funded student news information opinion entertainment academic communications media groups petitioners organization wide awake productions wap qualified cio formed petitioner ronald rosenberger undergraduates wap established publish magazine philosophical religious expression facilitate discussion fosters atmosphere sensitivity tolerance christian viewpoints provide unifying focus christians multicultural backgrounds app wap publishes wide awake christian perspective university virginia paper christian viewpoint evident first issue editors wrote journal offers christian perspective personal community issues especially relevant college students university virginia app editors committed paper mission challenge christians rosenberger university virginia live word deed according faith proclaim encourage students consider personal relationship jesus christ means ibid first issue articles racism crisis pregnancy stress prayer lewis ideas evil free reviews religious music next two issues wide awake featured stories homosexuality christian missionary work eating disorders well music reviews interviews university professors page wide awake end article review marked cross advertisements carried wide awake also reveal christian perspective journal part advertisers churches centers christian study christian bookstores june wap distributed copies wide awake university students free charge wap acquired cio status soon organized important consideration case religious organization wap accorded cio status defined guidelines religious organization organization whose purpose practice devotion acknowledged ultimate reality deity app pet cert stage controversy university contended wap organization months given cio status wap requested saf pay printer costs printing newspaper appropriations committee student council denied wap request ground wide awake religious activity within meaning guidelines newspaper promote manifest ed particular belie deity ultimate reality ibid made determination examining first issue app wap appealed denial full student council contending wap met rosenberger university virginia applicable guidelines denial saf support basis magazine religious perspective violated constitution appeal denied without comment wap appealed next level student activities committee letter signed dean students committee sustained denial funding app recourse within university structure wap wide awake three editors members filed suit district western district virginia challenging saf action violative rev stat alleged refusal authorize payment printing costs publication solely basis religious editorial viewpoint violated rights freedom speech press free exercise religion equal protection law relied also upon article virginia constitution virginia act religious freedom code ann supp pursue theories appeal suit sought damages costs printing paper injunctive declaratory relief attorney fees summary judgment district ruled university holding denial saf support impermissible content viewpoint discrimination petitioners speech university establishment clause concern religious activities sufficient justification denying payment contractors issue definitive ruling whether reimbursement made violated establishment clause supp wd appeals fourth circuit disagreement district held guidelines discriminate basis rosenberger university virginia content ruled state need underwrite speech presumptive violation speech clause viewpoint discrimination invoked deny payment otherwise available cios appeals affirmed judgment district nonetheless concluding discrimination university justified compelling interest maintaining strict separation church state ii rosenberger university virginia principles provide framework forbidding state exercising viewpoint discrimination even limited public forum one creation case involving school district provision school facilities private uses declared question district like private owner property may legally preserve property control use dedicated lamb chapel center moriches union free school slip necessities confining forum limited legitimate purposes created may justify state reserving certain groups discussion certain topics see cornelius naacp legal defense ed fund perry ed supra opened limited forum however state must respect lawful boundaries set state may exclude speech distinction reasonable light purpose served forum cornelius supra see also perry ed supra may discriminate speech basis viewpoint lamb chapel supra slip see also perry ed supra supra cf texas johnson thus determining whether state acting preserve limits forum created exclusion class speech legitimate observed distinction one hand content discrimination may permissible preserves purposes limited forum hand viewpoint discrimination presumed impermissible directed speech otherwise within forum limitations see perry ed supra saf forum metaphysical rosenberger university virginia spatial geographic sense principles applicable see perry ed supra forum analysis school mail system cornelius supra forum analysis charitable contribution program recent apposite case decision lamb chapel supra school district opened school facilities use school hours community groups wide variety social civic recreational purposes district however enacted formal policy opening facilities groups religious purposes invoking policy district rejected request group desiring show film series addressing various questions christian perspective indication record lamb chapel request use school facilities denied reason fact presentation religious perspective slip conclusion unanimous discriminates basis viewpoint permit school property used presentation views family issues except dealing subject matter religious standpoint ibid university acknowledge must light precedents ideologically driven attempts suppress particular point view presumptively unconstitutional funding contexts insists case present issue guidelines draw lines based content viewpoint brief respondents noted discrimination one set views ideas subset particular instance general phenomenon content discrimination see supra must acknowledged distinction precise one sense something understatement speak religious rosenberger university virginia thought discussion viewpoint distinct comprehensive body thought nature origins destiny dependence upon existence divine subjects philosophic inquiry throughout human history conclude nonetheless lamb chapel viewpoint discrimination proper way interpret university objections wide awake terms saf prohibition university exclude religion subject matter selects disfavored treatment student journalistic efforts religious editorial viewpoints religion may vast area inquiry also provides specific premise perspective standpoint variety subjects may discussed considered prohibited perspective general subject matter resulted refusal make payments subjects discussed otherwise within approved category publications dissent assertion viewpoint discrimination occurs guidelines discriminate entire class viewpoints reflects insupportable assumption debate bipolar speech response religious speech understanding complex multifaceted nature public discourse embraced contrived description marketplace ideas topic debate example racism exclusion several views problem offensive first amendment exclusion one objectionable exclude theistic atheistic perspective debate exclude one yet another political economic social viewpoint dissent declaration debate skewed long multiple voices silenced simply wrong debate skewed multiple ways university denial wap request rosenberger university virginia payments present case based upon viewpoint discrimination unlike discrimination school district relied upon lamb chapel found invalid church group lamb chapel qualified social civic organization save religious purposes furthermore school district lamb chapel pointed nothing religious views group rationale excluding message case university justifies denial saf participation wap ground contents wide awake reveal avowed religious perspective see supra bears passing mention dissent attempt distinguish lamb chapel entirely without support law relying transcript oral argument dissent seems argue found viewpoint discrimination case government excluded christian atheistic viewpoints expressed forum post relied distinction holding discriminating religious speech discriminating basis viewpoint indication opinion unlike advocate statements oral argument law exclusion inclusion religious antireligious voices forum bearing decision university tries escape consequences holding lamb chapel urging case involves provision funds rather access facilities university begins unremarkable proposition state must substantial discretion determining allocate scarce resources accomplish educational mission citing decisions rust sullivan regan taxation representation widmar vincent rosenberger university virginia university argues funding decisions inevitable lawful reasoning lamb chapel apply funding decisions well involving access facilities urged holding become judicial juggernaut constitutionalizing ubiquitous decisions schools colleges government entities routinely make allocation public funds brief respondents end university relies assurance widmar vincent supra course striking public university exclusion religious groups use school facilities made available student groups stated question right university make academic judgments best allocate scarce resources quoted language widmar proper recognition principle state speaker may make choices university determines content education provides university speaking permitted government regulate content expressed speaker enlists private entities convey message vein rust sullivan supra upheld government prohibition advice applicable recipients federal funds family planning counseling government create program encourage private speech instead used private speakers transmit specific information pertaining program recognized government appropriates public funds promote particular policy entitled say wishes government disburses public funds private entities convey governmental message may take legitimate appropriate steps rosenberger university virginia ensure message neither garbled distorted grantee see follow however suggest widmar restrictions proper university speak subsidize transmittal message favors instead expends funds encourage diversity views private speakers holding university may discriminate based viewpoint private persons whose speech facilitates restrict university speech controlled different principles see board ed westside community schools dist mergens hazelwood school dist kuhlmeier reason university reliance regan taxation representation supra inapposite well regan involved challenge congress choice grant tax deductions contributions made veterans groups engaged lobbying denying favorable status charities pursued lobbying efforts although acknowledging government required subsidize exercise fundamental rights see reaffirmed requirement viewpoint neutrality government provision financial benefits observing case different congress discriminate invidiously subsidies way ai suppression dangerous ideas see quoting cammarano turn quoting speiser randall regan relied distinction based preferential treatment certain speakers veterans organizations distinction based content messages groups speech cf perry ed university regulation us however rosenberger university virginia restriction sole rationale operative principle distinction university favored message private speech students evident case us university taken steps ensure distinction agreement cio must sign see supra university declares student groups eligible saf support university agents subject control responsibility offered pay contractors behalf private speakers convey messages university may silence expression selected viewpoints university urges constitutional standpoint funding speech differs provision access facilities money scarce physical facilities beyond fact given case proposition might true empirical matter underlying premise university discriminate based viewpoint demand space exceeded availability wrong well government justify viewpoint discrimination among private speakers economic fact scarcity meeting rooms lamb chapel scarce demand greater supply decision different incumbent state course ration allocate scarce resources acceptable neutral principle nothing decision indicated scarcity give state right exercise viewpoint discrimination otherwise impermissible vital first amendment speech principles stake first danger liberty lies granting state power examine publications determine whether based ultimate idea state classify second corollary danger speech chilling individual thought expression danger rosenberger university virginia especially real university setting state acts background tradition thought experiment center intellectual philosophic tradition see healy james keyishian board regents state univ sweezy new hampshire ancient athens europe entered new period intellectual awakening places like bologna oxford paris universities began voluntary spontaneous assemblages concourses students speak write learn see generally palmer colton history modern world ed quality creative power student intellectual life day remains vital measure school influence attainment university regulation cast disapproval particular viewpoints students risks suppression free speech creative inquiry one vital centers nation intellectual life college university campuses guideline invoked university deny contractor payments behalf wap sweeping restriction student thought student inquiry context university sponsored publications prohibition funding behalf publications primarily promot manifes particular belie deity ultimate reality ordinary commonsense meaning vast potential reach term promotes used comprehend writing advocating philosophic position rests upon belief deity ultimate reality see webster third new international dictionary defining promote contribute growth enlargement prosperity encourage term manifests bring within scope prohibition writing rosenberger university virginia explicable resting upon premise presupposes existence deity ultimate reality see defining manifest show plainly make palpably evident certain showing displaying prohibition applied much vigor bar funding essays hypothetical student contributors named plato spinoza descartes regulation covers university says see tr oral arg student journalistic efforts primarily manifest promote belief deity ultimate reality undergraduates named karl marx bertrand russell sartre likewise major essays excluded student publications manifestation beliefs first principles disqualifies writing seems case indeed difficult name renowned thinkers whose writings accepted save perhaps articles disclaiming connection ultimate philosophy plato contrive perhaps submit acceptable essay making pasta peanut butter cookies provided point necessary imperfections based principles discussed hold regulation invoked deny saf support terms application petitioners denial right free speech guaranteed first amendment remains considered whether violation following university action excused necessity complying constitution prohibition state establishment religion turn question iii rosenberger university virginia appeals ruled withholding saf support wide awake contravened speech clause first amendment proceeded hold university action justified necessity avoiding violation establishment clause interest found compelling recognizing regularly sanctioned awards direct nonmonetary benefits religious groups government created open fora similarly situated organizations invited citing widmar fourth circuit asserted direct monetary subsidization religious organizations projects beast entirely different color declared establishment clause permit use public funds support specifically religious activity otherwise substantially secular rosenberger university virginia setting quoting hunt mcnair emphasis deleted reasoned wide awake journal pervasively devoted discussion advancement avowedly christian theological personal philosophy university provision saf funds publication send unmistakably clear signal university virginia supports christian values wishes promote wide promulgation values assurance establishment clause retains force guarding governmental actions intended prohibit must case inquire first purpose object governmental action question practical details program operation turning matters however set forth certain general principles must bear upon determination central lesson decisions significant factor upholding governmental programs face establishment clause attack neutrality towards religion decided series cases addressing receipt government benefits religion religious views implicated degree first case modern establishment clause jurisprudence everson board ed ewing cautioned enforcing prohibition laws respecting establishment religion must sure inadvertently prohibit government extending general state law benefits citizens without regard religious belief held guarantee neutrality respected offended government following neutral criteria evenhanded policies extends benefits recipients whose ideologies viewpoints including religious ones rosenberger university virginia broad diverse see board ed kiryas joel village school dist grumet slip souter principle well grounded case law frequently relied explicitly general availability benefit provided religious groups individuals turning aside establishment clause challenges witters washington dept services blind mueller allen widmar rejected position establishment clause even justifies much less requires refusal extend free speech rights religious speakers participate government programs neutral design see lamb chapel mergens widmar supra governmental program neutral toward religion suggestion university created advance religion adopted ingenious device purpose aiding religious cause object saf open forum speech support various student enterprises including publication newspapers recognition diversity creativity student life university saf guidelines separate classification make payments behalf religious organizations whose purpose practice devotion acknowledged ultimate reality deity pet cert category support student news information opinion entertainment academic communications media groups wide awake school year wap seek subsidy christian editorial viewpoint sought funding student journal neutrality program distinguishes student fees tax levied direct support rosenberger university virginia church group churches tax sort course run contrary establishment clause concerns dating earliest days republic apprehensions predecessors involved levying taxes upon public sole exclusive purpose establishing supporting specific sects exaction contrast student activity fee designed reflect reality student life many dimensions includes necessity speech inquiry student expression integral part university educational mission fee mandatory us question whether objecting student first amendment right demand pro rata return extent fee expended speech subscribe see keller state bar california abood detroit board must treat exaction upon students paid semester students general tax designed raise revenue university see butler tax general understanding term used constitution signifies exaction support government see also head money cases saf used unlimited purposes much less illegitimate purpose supporting one religion much like arrangement widmar money goes special fund group students cio status draw purposes consistent university educational mission extent student interested speech withdrawal permitted cover whole spectrum speech whether manifests religious view antireligious view neither decision read addressing expenditure general tax fund rosenberger university virginia disbursements fund go private contractors cost printing protected speech clause first amendment far cry general public assessment designed effected provide financial support church government neutrality apparent state overall scheme meaningful respect program respects critical difference government speech endorsing religion establishment clause forbids private speech endorsing religion free speech free exercise clauses protect mergens supra opinion case government willfully fostered encouraged mistaken impression student newspapers speak university capitol square review advisory bd pinette ante slip university taken pains disassociate private speech involved case appeals apparent concern wide awake religious orientation attributed university plausible fear real likelihood speech question either endorsed coerced state see lee weisman witters supra citing lynch donnelly concurring see also witters supra concurring part concurring judgment citing lynch supra concurring appeals dissent correct extract decisions principle recognized special establishment clause dangers government makes direct money payments sectarian institutions citing roemer board pub works bowen kendrick hunt mcnair tilton rosenberger university virginia board ed central school dist allen error identifying principle believing controls case even assuming wap different church speech religious exercises conducted widmar two points much doubt appeals decided case essence dissent us confront case even neutral program includes nonsectarian recipients government making direct money payments institution group engaged religious activity neither appeals dissent believe takes sufficient cognizance undisputed fact public funds flow directly wap coffers violate establishment clause public university grant access facilities basis wide spectrum student groups including groups use meeting rooms sectarian activities accompanied devotional exercises see widmar mergens even upkeep maintenance repair facilities attributed uses paid student activities fund students required contribute widmar supra government usually acts spending money even provision meeting room mergens widmar involved governmental expenditure form electricity heating cooling costs error made appeals well dissent lies focusing money undoubtedly expended government rather nature benefit received recipient expenditure governmental funds prohibited whenever funds pay service pursuant program used group sectarian purposes widmar mergens rosenberger university virginia lamb chapel overruled given holdings cases follows public university may maintain computer facility give student groups access facility including use printers religion neutral say basis religious student organization obtained access basis used computer compose printer copy machine print speech religious content viewpoint state action providing group access violate establishment clause giving groups access assembly hall see lamb chapel center moriches school widmar supra mergens supra difference logic principle difference constitutional significance school using funds operate facility students access school paying contractor operate facility behalf latter occurs university provides printing services broad spectrum student newspapers qualified cios reason officers membership benefit religion incidental government provision secular services secular purposes basis printing routine secular recurring attribute student life paying outside printers university fact attains degree separation student publication avoids duties supervision escapes costs upkeep repair replacement attributable student use clear record costs result widmar university charge saf taxpayers whole discrete activity question formalistic us say university must forfeit advantages provide services order comply establishment clause rosenberger university virginia course true state pays church bills subsidizing must guard abuse danger based considerations advanced additional reason student publication religious institution least usual sense term used case law religious organization used university regulations instead publication involved pure forum expression ideas ideas incomplete chilled constitution interpreted require state officials courts scan publication ferret views principally manifest belief divine dissent view become law require university order avoid constitutional violation scrutinize content student speech lest expression question speech otherwise protected constitution contain great religious content dissent fact anticipates censorship crucial distinguishing works characterized evangelism wide awake writing merely happens express views given religion might approve post eventuality raises specter governmental censorship ensure student writings publications meet baseline standard secular orthodoxy impose standard student speech university imperil sources free speech expression recognized widmar official censorship far inconsistent establishment clause dictates governmental provision secular printing services basis dissent fails establish distinction religious speech speech religion intelligible content indication singing hymns reading scripture teaching rosenberger university virginia biblical principles cease singing teaching reading apparently forms speech despite religious subject matter become unprotected worship ven distinction drew arguably principled line highly doubtful lie within judicial competence administer merely draw distinction require university ultimately courts inquire significance words practices different religious faiths varying circumstances faith inquiries tend inevitably entangle state religion manner forbidden cases walz tax new york city citations omitted judgment appeals must reversed ordered rosenberger university virginia time held government generally may treat people differently based god gods worship worship board ed kiryas joel village school dist grumet slip concurring part concurring judgment insistence government neutrality toward religion explains held schools may discriminate religious groups denying equal access facilities schools make available see lamb chapel center moriches union free school widmar vincent withholding access leave impermissible perception religious activities disfavored message one neutrality rather endorsement state refused let religious groups use facilities open others demonstrate neutrality hostility toward religion board ed westside community schools dist mergens plurality opinion religion clauses prohibit government favoring religion provide warrant discriminating religion kiryas joel supra rosenberger university virginia slip neutrality form effect one hallmark establishment clause case lies intersection principle government neutrality prohibition state funding religious activities clear university established generally applicable program encourage free exchange ideas students expressive marketplace includes student publications predictably divergent viewpoints equally clear petitioners viewpoint religious publication wide awake religious activity university regulation fair reading precedents finance wide awake according petitioners violates principle neutrality sending message hostility toward religion finance wide awake argues university violates prohibition direct state funding religious activities two bedrock principles conflict understandably neither provide definitive answer reliance rosenberger university virginia categorical platitudes unavailing resolution instead depends hard task judging sifting details determining whether challenged program offends establishment clause judgment requires courts draw lines sometimes quite fine based particular facts case see lee weisman jurisprudence area necessity one justice holmes observed different context neither troubled question draw line question pretty much everything worth arguing law day night youth age types irwin gavit citation omitted witters washington dept services blind example unanimously held state may generally applicable financial aid program pay blind student tuition sectarian theological institution held however emphasizing vocational assistance provided washington program paid directly student transmits educational institution choice benefit religion program therefore akin public servant contributing government paycheck church ibid thus resolved conflict neutrality principle funding prohibition permitting one trump relying elements choice peculiar facts case aid religion issue result petitioner private choice reasonable observer likely draw facts us inference state endorsing religious practice belief concurring part concurring judgment see also zobrest catalina foothills school slip rosenberger university virginia need careful judgment fine distinctions presents even extreme cases everson board ed ewing provided perhaps strongest exposition principle tax amount large small levied support religious activities institutions whatever may called whatever form may adopt teach practice religion yet approved use public funds general program reimburse parents children bus fares attend catholic schools although cynically dismiss disposition inconsistent protestations see jackson dissenting fitting precedent julia according byron reports whispering consent consented decision reflected need rely careful judgment simple categories two principles equal historical jurisprudential pedigree come unavoidable conflict case nature dispute admit categorical answers inferred decision today see ante instead certain considerations specific program issue lead conclude providing assistance wide awake publications university endorsing magazine religious perspective first student organizations university insistence remain strictly independent university university agreement contracted independent organizations cio student groups provides university virginia public corporation cio part corporation rather exists operates independently university parties understand agree agreement source control rosenberger university virginia university may cio activities app although organization members university virginia students faculty employees organization independent corporation university responsible organization contracts acts omissions second financial assistance distributed manner ensures use permissible purposes student organization seeking assistance must submit disbursement requests approved funds paid directly vendor pass organization coffers safeguard accompanying university financial assistance provided publication religious viewpoint wide awake ensures funds used university purpose maintaining free robust marketplace ideas whatever perspective feature also makes case analogous school providing equal access generally available printing press physical facilities ante unlike block grant religious organizations third assistance provided religious publication context makes improbable perception government endorsement religious message wide awake exist vacuum competes magazines newspapers advertising readership widely divergent viewpoints many purveyors opinion supported rosenberger university virginia equal basis university significantly diminishes danger message one publication perceived endorsed university besides general news publications example university provided support yellow journal humor magazine targeted christianity subject satire publication promote better understanding islam university community app given wide array competing religious viewpoints forum supported university perception university endorses one particular viewpoint illogical harder case religious speech threatens dominate forum cf capitol square review advisory bd pinette ante concurring part concurring judgment mergens finally although question presented note possibility student fee susceptible free speech clause challenge objecting student compelled pay speech disagrees see keller state bar california abood detroit board education currently exists split lower courts whether challenge successful compare hays county guardian supple cert denied kania fordham good associated students univ en banc smith regents univ cal cert denied resolve question see ante existence possibility available citizens generally see abood supra powell concurring rosenberger university virginia judgment provides potential basis distinguishing proceeds student fees case proceeds general assessments support religion lie core prohibition religious funding see ante post thomas concurring post souter dissenting government funds generally unlike monies dispensed state federal treasuries student activities fund collected students administer fund select qualifying recipients among originally paid fee government neither pays draws common pool fee sort appears conducive granting individual students proportional refunds student activities fund represents government resources whether derived tax revenue sales assets otherwise fund simply belongs students decision today therefore neither trumpets supremacy neutrality principle signals demise funding prohibition establishment clause jurisprudence observed last term xperience proves establishment clause like free speech clause easily reduced single test kiryas joel slip concurring part concurring judgment bedrock principles collide test limits categorical obstinacy expose flaws dangers grand unified theory may turn neither grand unified today courts must many establishment clause cases focus specific features particular government action ensure violate constitution withholding wide awake assistance university provides generally student publications university discriminated basis magazine religious viewpoint rosenberger university virginia violation free speech clause particular features university program explicit disclaimer disbursement funds directly vendors vigorous nature forum issue possibility objecting students opt convince providing assistance case carry danger impermissible use public funds endorse wide awake religious message subject comments join opinion rosenberger university virginia justice thomas concurring agree opinion join full write separately express disagreement historical analysis put forward dissent although dissent starts right path consulting original meaning establishment clause misleading application history yields principle inconsistent nation long tradition allowing religious adherents participate equal terms neutral government programs even assuming virginia debate assessment controversy indicative principles embodied establishment clause incident hardly compels dissent conclusion government must actively discriminate religion dissent historical discussion glosses fundamental characteristic virginia assessment bill sparked controversy assessment imposed support clergy performance function teaching religion thus bill establishing provision teachers christian religion provided collection specific tax proceeds appropriated vestries elders directors rosenberger university virginia religious society provision minister teacher gospel denomination providing places divine worship none use whatsoever see everson board ed ewing appendix dissent rutledge rosenberger university virginia james madison memorial remonstrance religious assessments hereinafter madison remonstrance must understood context contrary dissent suggestion madison objection assessment bill rest premise religious entities may never participate equal terms neutral government programs madison embrace argument forms linchpin dissent monetary subsidies constitutionally different neutral benefits programs instead madison comments consistent neutrality principle dissent inexplicably discards according madison virginia assessment flawed violate equality basis every law madison remonstrance reprinted everson supra appendix dissent rutledge assessment violated equality principle allowed religious groups participate generally available government program bill singled religious entities special benefits see ibid arguing assessment violated equality principle subjecting peculiar burdens granting others peculiar exemptions legal commentators disagreed historical lesson take assessment controversy experience virginia consistent view framers saw establishment rosenberger university virginia clause simply prohibition governmental preferences religious faiths others see cord separation church state historical fact current fiction smith getting wrong foot back reexamination history framing religion clauses first amendment critique reynolds everson decisions wake forest rev commentators rejected view concluding establishment clause forbids government preferences religious sects others also government preferences religion irreligion see laycock nonpreferential aid religion false claim original intent wm mary rev find much commend former view madison focus preferential nature assessment restricted fourth paragraph remonstrance discussed funding provided virginia assessment extended christian sects remonstrance seized defect see authority establish christianity exclusion religions may establish ease particular sect christians exclusion sects madison remonstrance reprinted everson supra rosenberger university virginia resolution debate necessary decide case understanding assessment controversy history cited dissent support conclusion establishment clause categorically condemn state programs directly aiding religious activity aid part neutral program available wide array beneficiaries post even madison believed principle nonestablishment religion precluded government financial support religion per se sense government benefits specifically targeting religion indication time framing took dissent extreme view government must discriminate religious adherents excluding generally available financial subsidies rosenberger university virginia fact madison early legislative proposals cut dissent suggestion virginia revolutionary convention drafting declaration rights madison prepared amendment disestablished anglican church amendment went far convention adopted nearly sweeping dissent version disestablishment madison merely wanted convention declare man class men account religion invested peculiar emoluments privileges madison amendments declaration rights may papers james madison hutchinson rachal eds emphasis added likewise madison remonstrance stressed government best supported protecting every citizen enjoyment religion equal hand protects person property neither invading equal rights sect suffering sect invade another madison remonstrance reprinted everson supra cf terrett taylor cranch holding virginia constitution prevent government aiding votaries every sect perform religious duties establishing funds support ministers public charities endowment churches rosenberger university virginia sepulture dead stripped flawed historical premise dissent argument reduced claim establishment clause jurisprudence permits neutrality context access government facilities requires discrimination access government funds dissent purports locate prohibition direct public funding heart establishment clause see post conclusion fails confront historical examples funding date back time founding take one famous example houses first congress elected chaplains see ed ed congress enacted legislation providing annual salary paid treasury see act ch stat madison member committee recommended chaplain system house see annals cong cord supra system direct public funding congressional chaplains continued without interruption ever since early session congress marsh chambers rosenberger university virginia historical evidence government support religious entities property tax exemptions also overwhelming dissent concedes property tax exemptions religious bodies place years without disruption interests represented establishment clause post citing walz tax new york city view dissent acceptance tradition puts rest notion establishment clause bars monetary aid religious groups even aid equally available groups tax exemption many cases economically functionally indistinguishable direct monetary subsidy one instance government relieves rosenberger university virginia religious entities along others generally applicable tax relieves religious entities along others burden tax returning form cash subsidy whether benefit provided front back end taxation process financial aid religious rosenberger university virginia groups undeniable analysis establishment clause must also concepts deeply embedded fabric national life beginning colonial times government exercise least kind benevolent neutrality toward churches religious exercise walz supra consistent application dissent principle require church protected police fire departments public sidewalk kept repair zobrest catalina foothills school slip quoting widmar vincent dissent admits evenhandedness may become important ensuring religious interests inhibited post surely dissent must concede however result obtain whether government provides populace fire protection reimbursing costs smoke detectors overhead sprinkler systems establishing public fire department churches may benefit equal terms groups latter program public fire department may extinguish fires churches may also benefit equal terms former program though establishment clause jurisprudence hopeless disarray case provides opportunity reaffirm one basic principle enjoyed uncharacteristic degree consensus clause compel exclusion religious groups government benefits programs generally available broad class participants see lamb chapel center moriches union free school zobrest supra board ed westside community schools dist mergens texas monthly bullock witters washington dept services blind rosenberger university virginia mueller allen widmar supra dissent view however university virginia may provide neutral access university printing press may provide service press owned third party surprisingly dissent offers logical justification conclusion none evident text original meaning first amendment establishment clause offended religious adherents benefit neutral programs university virginia student activities fund must also offended receive benefits form subsidies constitutional demands establishment clause may judged either baseline neutrality baseline aid religion appropriate baseline surely depend fortuitous circumstances surrounding form aid contrary rule lead absurd results jettison centuries practice respecting right religious adherents participate neutral terms wide variety programs nation tradition allowing religious adherents participate evenhanded government programs hardly limited class essential public benefits identified dissent see post broader tradition traced least far back first congress ratified northwest ordinance see act ch stat article iii famous enactment confederation congress provided religion morality knowledge necessary good government happiness mankind schools means learning shall forever encouraged congress subsequently set aside federal lands northwest territory territories use schools see act mar ch rosenberger university virginia stat act mar ch stat act ch stat act apr ch stat act apr ch stat many schools enjoyed benefits land grants undoubtedly sectarian institutions requirement schools public see antieau downey roberts freedom federal establishment formation early history first amendment religion clauses nevertheless early congresses found problem provision neutral benefits see also noting almost universally americans accepted practiced governmental aid religion religiously oriented educational institutions numerous government benefits traditionally available religious adherents neutral terms several examples may found work early congresses including copyright protection author authors map chart book books act may ch stat privilege allowing every printer newspapers send one paper every printer newspapers within free postage act ch stat neither laws made exclusion numerous authors printers manifested belief deity thus history provides answer constitutional question posed case one given dissent dissent identifies evidence framers intended disable religious entities participating neutral terms evenhanded government programs evidence exist points opposite direction provides ample support today decision footnotes even assuming future legislators adhere bill directive appropriating undesignated tax revenues nothing bill prevent use funds solely sectarian educational institutions contrary schools time founding affiliated religious organization see antieau downey roberts freedom federal establishment formation early history first amendment religion clauses fact system public education virginia several decades assessment bill proposed see morrison beginnings public education virginia see also johnson legal status relationships virginia parish institutions transported england earliest educational agencies although much teaching took place home aid tutors every minister school duty vestry see poor children taught read write omitted clearly religious tenor virginia assessment rosenberger university virginia seem point toward appropriation residual funds sectarian seminaries learning finally although modern historians focused provision dissent provides indication madison viewed virginia assessment evenhanded program fact several objections expressed madison memorial remonstrance religious assessments reprinted everson supra focus clearly bill violation principle equality evenhandedness see infra contrary madison remonstrance decried fact assessment bill require civil society take cognizance religion madison remonstrance reprinted everson rosenberger university virginia board ed ewing respondent exclusion religious activities saf funding creates problem requires university officials classify publications religious activities discriminate publications fall category policy also contravenes principles expressed madison remonstrance encouraging religious adherents cleanse speech religious overtones thus degrad ing equal rank citizens whose opinions religion bend legislative authority id reprinted everson supra number less familiar examples amount direct funding appear early acts congress see act ch stat authorizing state ohio sell part lands heretofore reserved appropriated congress support religion within ohio company purchases invest money arising sale thereof productive fund proceeds shall ever annually applied support religion within several townships said lands originally reserved set apart use purpose whatsoever act mar ch stat granting georgetown college jesuit institution lots city washington amount value thousand dollars directing rosenberger university virginia college sell lots invest proceeds thereafter using dividends establish endow professorships saw fit see also wallace jaffree rehnquist dissenting moved century congress appropriated time public moneys support sectarian indian education carried religious organizations virginia experience period assessment controversy inconsistent rigid principle embraced dissent since least virginia legislature authorized tax exemptions property belonging commonwealth county town college houses divine worship seminary learning act ch acts even thomas jefferson respondent founder champion disestablishment virginia advocated use public funds virginia department theology conjunction professional schools see padover complete jefferson see also noting jefferson advocated giving sectarian schools divinity full benefit public provisions made instruction branches science tax literature identity called tax expenditure concept based upon recognition fact government appropriate money particular person group using special narrowly directed tax deduction exclusion instead using rosenberger university virginia ordinary direct spending mechanisms example government general income tax wanting add spendable income preacher whose top tax rate two ways subsidizing government send preacher check tax income authorize reduce taxable income resulting tax saving direct payment taxable alter tax bracket preacher receive benefit tax deduction direct payment wolfman tax expenditures idea ideology harv rev fact congress provided similar tax expenditure internal revenue code granting minister gospel unlimited exclusion rental value home furnished part pay rental allowance paid see although professor bittker certainly leading scholar tax field dissent reliance bittker see post misplaced context see adler internal revenue code constitution courts use tax expenditure analysis judicial decision making wake forest rev early criticism tax expenditure concept focused difficulty drawing dividing line special provision professor boris bittker example argued since tax inclusive exemptions tax described equivalent subsidies boris bittker churches taxes constitution yale wholesale rejection tax expenditure analysis attracted supporters rather large body literature tax expenditures accepts basic concept special exemptions tax function subsidies current debate focuses whether particular items correctly identified tax expenditures whether incentive provisions efficient structured tax expenditures rather direct spending programs see generally numerous authorities rosenberger university virginia today first time approves direct funding core religious activities arm state however erroneous treatment familiar principles law implementing first amendment establishment speech clauses viewing funds question beyond reach establishment clause funding restrictions warrant distinguishing among public funding sources purposes applying first amendment prohibition religious establishment hold university refusal support petitioners religious activities compelled establishment clause therefore affirm rosenberger university virginia rosenberger university virginia difficulties clear closer look wide awake majority opinion affords character magazine candidly disclosed opening page first issue announces wide awake mission letter readership signed love christ challenge christians live word deed according faith proclaim encourage students consider personal relationship jesus christ means app masthead every issue bears paul exhortation hour come awake slumber salvation nearer first believed romans issue wide awake contained record makes good editor promise echoes apostle call accept salvation way salvation confessing repenting sin christian duty make sinners aware need salvation thus christians must confront condemn sin else fail duty love mourad prince relationship get final gate lord handing boarding passes examine ticket lifetime request seat friendly skies flyer trusting asking pilot list reserved seats lord know able buy ticket amount money desire trick met chosen pilot flown straight hell express jet without air conditioning toilets course ace plane rosenberger university virginia truth go world preach good news creation mark great commission lives christians liu christianity stool spirit provides access intimate relationship lord universe awakens minds comprehend spiritual truth empowers us serve effective ambassadors lord jesus earthly lives buterbaugh spiritual advantage even featured essays facially secular topics become platforms call readers fulfill tenets christianity lives although piece racism general discussion subject proceeds beyond even analysis interpretation biblical texts conclude counsel take action christian thing god calls us take risks voluntarily stepping comfort zones take joy whole richness inheritance body rosenberger university virginia christ must take love receive god share peoples world racism disease heart soul mind extirpated individual consciousness replaced love peace god true personal communal healing begin liu et eracing mistakes thinking people profess belief god must grasp firmly truth reality christ christ bread life john full alone provide ultimate source spiritual fulfillment permeates emotional psychological physical dimensions lives ferguson lassiter calorie calvary rosenberger university virginia using public funds direct subsidization preaching word categorically forbidden establishment clause clause meant accomplish nothing else meant bar use public money evidence subject antedates even bill rights may seen writings madison whose authority questions meaning establishment clause well settled committee public ed religious liberty nyquist everson board ed ewing four years first congress proposed first amendment madison gave opinion legitimacy using public funds religious purposes memorial remonstrance religious assessments played central role ensuring defeat virginia tax assessment bill framed debate upon religion clauses stand see authority force citizen contribute three pence property support one establishment may force conform establishment cases whatsoever james madison memorial remonstrance religious assessments hereinafter madison remonstrance reprinted everson supra appendix dissent rutledge rosenberger university virginia rosenberger university virginia rosenberger university virginia sentiment expressed madison virginia led defeat virginia tax assessment bill also directly passage virginia bill establishing religious freedom written thomas jefferson bill preamble declared compel man furnish contributions money propagation opinions disbelieves sinful tyrannical jefferson bill establishing religious freedom reprinted founder constitution kurland lerner eds text provided hat man shall compelled frequent support religious worship place ministry whatsoever ibid see generally everson supra previously recognized provisions first amendment drafting adoption madison jefferson played leading roles objective intended provide protection governmental intrusion religious liberty virginia statute ibid see also laycock nonpreferential aid religion false claim original intent wm mary rev debates support proposition framers opposed government financial support religion substitute small taxes large taxes three pence rosenberger university virginia bad larger sum principle mattered respect money religion wholly voluntary churches either support government neither help interfere omitted curry first freedoms time framing bill rights belief government assistance religion especially form taxes violated religious liberty long history choper securing religious liberty broad consensus central threat religious freedom individuals groups indeed judgment many serious infringement upon religious liberty posed forcing pay taxes support religious establishment religious activities footnotes omitted internal quotation marks omitted rosenberger university virginia principle direct funding public money patently violated contested use today student activity fee like today taxes generally rosenberger university virginia fee madison threepence university exercises power state compel student pay see jefferson preamble supra use part direct support religious activity thus strikes repeatedly held heart prohibition establishment everson establishment religion clause means least tax amount large small levied support religious activities institutions whatever may called whatever form may adopt teach practice religion see school dist grand rapids ball although establishment clause jurisprudence characterized absolutes clause absolutely prohibit indoctrination beliefs particular religious faith committee public education nyquist absence effective means guaranteeing state aid derived public funds used exclusively secular neutral nonideological purposes clear cases direct aid whatever form invalid primary among evils establishment clause guards sponsorship financial support active involvement sovereign religious activity citations internal quotation marks omitted see also lee weisman scalia dissenting coercion hallmark historical establishments religion coercion religious orthodoxy financial support force law threat penalty emphasis omitted cf flast cohen holding taxpayers adequate stake outcome establishment clause litigation rosenberger university virginia satisfy article iii standing requirements stating ur history vividly illustrates one specific evils feared drafted establishment clause fought adoption taxing spending power used favor one religion another support religion general accordingly never upheld direct state funding sort proselytizing published wide awake fact categorically condemned state programs directly aiding religious activity school dist ball supra striking programs providing secular instruction nonpublic school students nonpublic school premises indistinguishable provision direct cash subsidy religious school clearly prohibited establishment clause wolman walter striking field trip aid program constituted impermissible direct aid sectarian education meek pittenger striking material equipment loan program nonpublic schools inability channe aid secular without providing direct aid sectarian committee public education nyquist supra striking aid nonpublic schools maintenance repair facilities attempt made restrict payments expenditures related upkeep facilities used exclusively secular purposes levitt committee public ed religious liberty striking aid nonpublic schools tests state failed assure activity used religious indoctrination tilton richardson plurality opinion striking insufficient limit prohibition religious use federal construction program university facilities unrestricted use even years effect contribution rosenberger university virginia value religious body douglas black marshall concurring part dissenting part even upheld aid institution performing secular sectarian functions always made searching enquiry ensure institution kept secular activities separate sectarian ones direct aid flowing former never latter bowen kendrick upholding grant program services related premarital adolescent sexual relations ground funds used grantees way advance religion roemer board pub works plurality opinion upholding general aid program restricting uses funds secular activities hunt mcnair upholding general revenue bond program excluding participation facilities used religious purposes tilton richardson supra plurality opinion upholding general aid program construction academic facilities evidence religion seeps use facilities see board ed central school dist allen upholding textbook loan program limited secular books requested individual students secular educational purposes reasonable minds may differ whether reached correct result cases common principle never questioned repudiated although establishment clause jurisprudence characterized absolutes clause absolutely prohibit indoctrination beliefs particular religious faith school dist ball rosenberger university virginia apply clear law clear facts conclude funding scheme clear constitutional violation answer must part fails confront evidence set preceding section throughout opinion refers uninformatively wide awake christian viewpoint ante religious perspective ante distinguishing funding wide awake funding church maintains wide awake religious institution least usual sense ante see also ante quote magazine adoption saint paul exhortation awaken nearness salvation articles enjoining readers accept jesus christ religious verses religious textual analyses suggested prayers easy lose sight university students appeals found obvious blanch patently frankly evangelistic character magazine unrevealing allusions religious points view nevertheless even without encumbrance detail wide awake actual pages finds something sufficiently religious magazine require examination establishment clause one may therefore ask unequivocal prohibition direct funding lead conclude funding unconstitutional answer focuses subsidiary body law correctly ultimately misapplies subsidiary body law accounts rosenberger university virginia substantial attention fact university funding scheme neutral formal sense makes funds available evenhanded basis secular sectarian applicants alike ante indeed true relevant cases alone satisfy requirements establishment clause recognizes says evenhandedness significant factor certain establishment clause analysis dispositive one ante see ante see also ante concurring neutrality form effect one hallmark establishment clause capitol square review advisory board pinette slip concurring part concurring judgment establishment clause forbids state hiding behind application formally neutral criteria remaining studiously oblivious effects actions ot state policies permissible religion clauses simply neutral form recognition reflects appreciation two general rules whenever affirmative government aid ultimately benefits religion establishment clause requires justification beyond evenhandedness government part direct public funding core sectarian activities even accomplished pursuant evenhanded program entirely inconsistent establishment clause strike heart clause protection see ante confront case even neutral program includes nonsectarian recipients government making direct money payments institution group engaged religious activity ante see also ante concurring decisions provide precedent use public funds finance religious activities rosenberger university virginia order understand thus begins sound rules ends unsound result necessary explore rules greater detail foregoing quotations opinion indicate relationship prohibition direct aid requirement evenhandedness affirmative government aid result benefit religion reflects relationship basic rule marginal criterion heart establishment clause stands prohibition direct public funding prohibition answer questions occur margins clause application government activity provides incidental benefit religion likewise unconstitutional wrong put fires burning churches wrong pay bus fares students way parochial schools wrong allow grantee special education funds spend religious college questions call drawing lines drawing evenhandedness becomes important however may past phrased test question whether benefits provided evenhanded basis relevant question addresses one aspect issue whether law truly neutral respect religion whether law either advance inhibit religion allegheny county greater pittsburgh chapter american civil liberties union widmar vincent example noted provision benefits broad spectrum religious nonreligious groups important index secular effect see also board ed kiryas joel village school dist grumet slip doubtful cases involving direct public funding initially room argument law effect rosenberger university virginia evenhandedness serves weed laws impermissibly advance religion channelling aid exclusively evenhandedness therefore prerequisite enquiry constitutionality doubtful law evenhandedness goes guarantee success establishment clause scrutiny three cases permitting indirect aid religion mueller allen witters washington dept services blind zobrest catalina foothills school among latest illustrate relevance evenhandedness advancement obvious patently unconstitutional case involved program benefits given individuals basis ultimately used individuals one way another support religious institutions fact aid distributed generally neutral basis necessary condition upholding program issue witters supra mueller supra zobrest supra slip significance evenhandedness stopped cases hold satisfying rosenberger university virginia condition sufficient dispositive even importantly never held evenhandedness might sufficient render direct aid religion constitutional quite contrary critical decisions cases fact aid indirect reached religious institutions result genuinely independent private choices aid recipients witters supra see also mueller supra zobrest supra slip noting relying particular feature programs issue fact reaffirmed core prohibition direct funding religious activities see zobrest supra slip witters supra see also mueller supra thus holdings cases little extensions unremarkable proposition state may issue paycheck one employees may donate part paycheck religious institution without constitutional barrier witters supra attenuated financial benefit ultimately controlled private choices individual found simply within contemplation establishment clause broad prohibition mueller supra see also witters supra opinion rosenberger university virginia evenhandedness one element permissibly attenuated benefit course far cry evenhandedness sufficient condition constitutionality direct financial support religious proselytization cases unsurprisingly repudiated attempt cut establishment rosenberger university virginia clause mere prohibition unequal direct aid see tilton richardson striking portion general aid program providing grants construction college university facilities extent program made possible use funds sectarian activities wolman walter striking funding field trips nonpublic school students provided public school students district unacceptable danger state funds used foster religion nowhere adherence preeminence principle principle evenhandedness clear bowen kendrick bowen involved consideration adolescent family life act afla federal grant program providing funds institutions counseling educational services related adolescent sexuality pregnancy time litigation grants awarded afla broad array secular religiously affiliated institutions establishment clause challenge act brought taxpayers interested parties district resolved case motion summary judgment holding afla program unconstitutional face also insofar religious institutions involved receiving grants act reversed issue facial constitutionality establishment clause said intimation rosenberger university virginia statute point grantees religious uses permitted contrary looking legislative history applicable regulations found safeguards adequate ensure grants used grantees way advance religion respect claim program unconstitutional applied remanded case district consideration evidence presented appellees insofar sheds light manner statute presently administered specifically told district remand consider whether particular cases afla aid used fund specifically religious activit ies otherwise substantially secular setting quoting hunt mcnair giving additional guidance district suggested application act unconstitutional turned aid recipients using materials explicitly religious content designed inculcate views particular religious faith ibid point opinion suggest breadth potential recipients distribution evenhanded basis justified use federal funds religious activities position made sense pegged act facial constitutionality conclusion advancement religion inevitable justice separate opinion case underscored point fully agree ublic funds may used endorse religious message post blackmun dissenting ny use public funds promote religious doctrines violates establishment clause concurring opinion emphasis original bowen sport pedigree line everson board board rosenberger university virginia ed allen tilton richardson hunt mcnair roemer board pub works cases involved general aid program provided benefits broad array secular sectarian institutions evenhanded basis none fact dispositive plurality opinion roemer made point exactly taken view secular purpose facial neutrality may enough fact state lending direct support religious activity state may example pay actually religious education even though purports paying secular one even though makes aid available secular religious institutions alike opinion blackmun witters mueller zobrest expressly preserve standard thus exhibited often cases explicitly distinguished indirect aid issue contrasting examples line cases striking direct aid thereby expressly preserved core constitutional principle direct aid religion impermissible see zobrest supra slip distinguishing meek pittenger school dist ball noting state may grant aid religious school whether cash kind effect aid direct subsidy religious school quoting witters see also ibid rosenberger university virginia mueller appears university perfectly understood primacy rule evenhandedness principle drew line short funding activity primarily promotes manifests particular belief deity ultimate reality app pet rosenberger university virginia cert since conformity marginal limiting principle evenhandedness insufficient demonstrate constitutionality providing government benefit reaches religion must identify element funding scheme demonstrate permissibility one reason another chosen element appears fact university guidelines funds sent printer chosen wide awake rather wide awake ante suggestion feature funding program brings case line witters mueller zobrest discussed supra misread cases turned fact choice benefit religion made third party standing government religious institution see witters see also mueller zobrest slip third party standing government ultimate religious beneficiary break circuit independent discretion put state money religious use printer course option take money use print secular journal instead wide awake gets money contract print message religious evangelism direction wide awake receive payment rosenberger university virginia precisely formalism distinguishing payment wide awake pay approved bill payment approved bill basis decision constitutional law indeed critical distinction constitution permit state pay bills religious institution fact despite purported adherence principle state simply hand credit cards religious institutions honor monthly statements long someone devise evenhanded umbrella cover whole scheme witters cases distinguished existence way probable however reference printer goes different attempt justify payment purported justification payment printer significant last step argument resting assumption public university may give religious group use equipment facilities long secular groups likewise eligible starts cases widmar vincent board ed westside community schools mergens lamb chapel center moriches rosenberger university virginia union free school religious groups held entitled access speaking government buildings open generally purpose reasons availability forum economic value government built maintained building speakers saved rent hall economically difference university provision value room value say university printing equipment therefore university must able provide use latter since may argument goes unduly formalistic draw line paying outside printer simply magazine publishers done university printing equipment ante argument unsound simple first troubles emerges examination cases relied upon support common factual thread running widmar mergens lamb chapel governmental institution created limited forum use students school college public large sought exclude speakers religious messages see generally perry ed assn perry local educators forum analysis case restriction struck either impermissible attempt regulate content speech open forum widmar mergens suppress particular religious viewpoint lamb chapel see infra case sure religious speaker use room passed muster incident plan facilitate speech generally secular purpose entailing neither secular entanglement religion risk religious speech taken speech government government endorsement religious message inferred rosenberger university virginia case drew ultimately unexceptionable speech clause doctrine treating evangelist salvation army millennialist hare krishna like speaker public forum preservation free speech model street corner supplied justification going beyond requirement evenhandedness claim support cases ruled scope holdings indeed allow limited benefit religious speakers rest recognition speakers entitled use street corner even though state paves roads provides police protection everyone street analogy public street corner open classroom space thus found significant classroom speakers engage traditional speech activities forums even though rooms like street corners require incidental state spending maintain analogy breaks entirely however cases read broadly wrote cover forums literal speaking traditional street corner printing provided government equal terms comers forum cases lifted higher plane generalization without admitting new economic benefits extended directly religion clear violation principle barring direct aid argument economic equivalence thus breaks recognizing direct state aid support mitigated street corner analogy service free speech absent rule direct aid stands bar printing services well printers rosenberger university virginia must indeed recognition point leads take third tack coming yet third attempt justification within rules existing case law recasting scope establishment clause ways make affirmative justification unnecessary justice makes comprehensive analysis manner activity fee assessed distributed concludes funding differs sharply religious funding governmental treasuries generally falls outside establishment clause purview absence message religious endorsement finds present ante concurring opinion concludes expansively activity fee tax proceeds find aid permissible legal assumption bar direct aid applies aid derived tax revenue already indicated fanciful treat fee anything tax supra see also ante noting mandatory nature fee repeat point novelty assumption direct aid bar extends aid derived taxation however requires response although taxation scheme moved madison write first instance never held government resources obtained without taxation used direct religious support cases direct government aid frequently spoken terms way limited tax revenues school dist ball although establishment clause jurisprudence characterized absolutes clause absolutely prohibit indoctrination beliefs particular religious faith nyquist absence rosenberger university virginia effective means guaranteeing state aid derived public funds used exclusively secular neutral nonideological purposes clear cases direct aid whatever form invalid primary among evils establishment clause guards sponsorship financial support active involvement sovereign religious activity citations internal quotation marks omitted see also curry first freedoms time framing bill rights belief government assistance religion especially form taxes violated religious liberty long history allowing funds spent religion fact fly face clear principle leaving entirely aside question whether public revenues ever used finance religion without violating endorsement test see allegheny county american civil liberties union use ignore one dual objectives establishment clause meant protect individuals republics destructive consequences mixing government religion protect religion corrupting dependence support government engel vitale establishment clause first immediate purpose rested belief union government religion tends destroy government degrade religion everson rutledge dissenting great condition religious liberty maintained free sustenance also interferences state comes rest upon secular foundation vanishes resting citing madison remonstrance reprinted everson supra appendix dissent rutledge school dist abington schempp rosenberger university virginia brennan concurring nonbeliever fears injection sectarian doctrines controversies civil polity high degree devout believer fears secularization creed becomes deeply involved dependent upon government omitted jefferson bill establishing religious freedom reprinted founder constitution since corrupting effect government support turn whether government money comes taxation gift sale public lands establishment clause hardly relax vigilance simply tax revenue implicated accordingly absence forthright disavowal one assume mean eliminate one half establishment clause justification nothing opinion lead end enquiry application establishment clause differently way began ordering instrumentality state support religious evangelism direct funding flat violation establishment clause ii given dispositive effect establishment clause bar funding magazine need decide whether absence bar university violate free speech clause limiting funding done widmar university compliance establishment clause obligations compelling interest justifying speech restriction speech analysis may independent application flaws pass unremarked acknowledges ante necessity university make judgments based content rosenberger university virginia may said taught decides absence unlimited amounts money resources honor educational responsibilities widmar supra cf perry subject matter speaker identity distinctions inherent inescapable process limiting nonpublic forum activities compatible intended purpose property generally question allocating public funds state university enjoys spacious discretion cf rust sullivan hen government appropriates public funds establish program entitled define limits program regan taxation representation upholding government subsidization decision partial one class speaker accordingly recognizes relevant enquiry case merely whether university bases funding decisions subject matter student speech infirmity basis rosenberger university virginia university funding decision must university impermissibly distinguishing among competing viewpoints ante citing inter alia perry supra see also lamb chapel slip subject matter distinctions permissible controlling access limited public forum reasonable viewpoint neutral cornelius naacp legal defense ed fund similar regan supra issue whether distinction based viewpoint turn simply whether government regulation happens applied speaker seeks advance particular viewpoint issue course turns whether burden speech explained reference viewpoint see cornelius supra government violates first amendment denies access speaker solely suppress point view espouses otherwise includible subject deciding whether speech restriction government purpose controlling consideration ward rock racism see also ibid content neutrality turns inter alia whether speech restriction justified without reference content regulated speech internal quotation marks rosenberger university virginia citations omitted example city enforces excessive noise ordinance pulling plug rock band using forbidden amplification system guilty viewpoint discrimination simply band wishes use equipment espouse antiracist views accord rock racism supra municipality decision prohibit political advertising bus placards amount viewpoint discrimination course applying policy denies space person wishes speak favor particular political candidate accord lehman shaker heights plurality opinion accordingly prohibition viewpoint discrimination serves important purpose free speech clause bar government skewing public debate things equal viewpoint discrimination occurs government allows one message prohibiting messages reasonably expected respond see first nat bank boston bellotti especially legislature suppression speech suggests attempt give one side debatable public question advantage expressing views people first amendment plainly offended omitted madison joint school dist wisconsin employment relations permit one side debatable public question monopoly expressing views antithesis constitutional guarantees omitted kokinda viewpoint discrimination involves inten discourage one viewpoint advance another plurality opinion citations internal quotation marks omitted precisely element taking sides public debate identifies viewpoint discrimination makes pernicious distinctions based content thus rosenberger university virginia government assists espousing one point view neutrality requires assist espousing opposing points view well viewpoint discrimination university application guidelines deny funding wide awake guidelines religious activit eligible funding app pet cert activity primarily promotes manifests particular belief deity ultimate reality app pet cert clear basis wide awake productions denied funding letter student council ronald rosenberger app reviewing request wide awake productions appropriations committee determined organization request funded religious activity discussion wide awake content supra shows beyond question primarily promotes manifests particular belief deity specific sense manifest function call students repentance commitment jesus christ particular moral action christian character guidelines written applied limit christian advocacy evangelical efforts might compete discrimination based viewpoint regulation authorizes applies muslim jewish buddhist advocacy well christian since limits funding activities promoting manifesting particular belief deity ultimate reality applies agnostics atheists well deists theists university maintained oral argument tr oral arg recognizes see ante guidelines application wide awake thus skew debate funding one position rosenberger university virginia competitors understood application wide awake simply deny funding hortatory speech primarily promotes manifests view merits religion deny funding entire subject matter religious apologetics course reads guidelines differently believe wrong construing breadth important point even construction guidelines impose viewpoint discrimination attempting demonstrate potentially chilling effect funding restrictions might learning nation universities describes guidelines sweeping restriction student thought student inquiry disentitling vast array topics funding ante reads guidelines exclude writing explicable resting upon premise presupposes existence deity ultimate reality well student journalistic efforts primarily manifest promote belief deity ultimate reality concludes major works writers descartes sartre barred funding forum ante goes far suggest guidelines properly interpreted tolerate nothing much essays making pasta peanut butter cookies ante regulation categorically broad protests reads word primarily primarily promotes manifests particular belief deity ultimate reality right guidelines whereas obviously crucial distinguishing works characterized evangelism wide awake writing merely happens express views given religion might approve simply descriptive writing informing reader position given religion said rosenberger university virginia important point even indeed correct funding restriction categorical breadth stringency restriction certainly work impermissible viewpoint discrimination prior understanding species content discrimination university wished fund speech beyond subjects pasta cookie preparation surely discriminating basis someone viewpoint least absent controversial claim pasta cookies exist upshot instructional universe without higher education universe one viewpoint enriched competitors guidelines thus substantially different access restriction considered lamb chapel case upon heavily relies finding viewpoint distinction ante lamb chapel addressed school board regulation prohibiting use school premises group religious purposes even though forum otherwise open variety social civic recreational purposes slip citation internal quotation marks omitted religious understood refer viewpoint believer regulation purport deny access speaker wishing express expressly antireligious point view subject see ibid issue case whether violates free speech clause first amendment deny church access school premises exhibit public viewing assertedly religious purposes film dealing family issues slip citing may school rosenberger university virginia understanding unremarkable lamb chapel unanimously determined access restriction applied speaker wishing discuss family values christian perspective impermissibly distinguished speakers basis viewpoint see lamb chapel supra slip considering challenge equally obvious distinction case one regulation applied deny funding discuss issues general religious viewpoint engaged promoting opposing religious conversion religious observances amounts viewpoint discrimination eviscerated line viewpoint content put point another way decision equating categorical exclusion sides religious debate viewpoint discrimination suggests rosenberger university virginia concluded primarily religious antireligious speech grouped together always provides opposing merely related viewpoint speech secular topic thus reasoning requires university funds private publications primarily nonreligious topic also fund publications primarily espousing adherence rejection religion university decision fund magazine racism fund publications aimed urging repentance god skew debate either racism desirability religious conversion contrary holding amounts significant reformulation viewpoint discrimination precedents significantly expand access forums see greer spock upholding regulation prohibiting political speeches military base cornelius exclusion fundraising drive political activity advocacy groups facially viewpoint neutral despite inclusion charitable health welfare agencies perry ability teachers bargaining representative use internal school mail system require access provided citizen group community organization message school personnel lehman exclusion political messages forum permissible despite ability nonpolitical speakers use forum plurality opinion iii rosenberger university virginia respectfully dissent justice thomas suggests madison approved assessment bill satisfied principle evenhandedness nowhere remonstrance however madison advance view virginia able provide financial support religion part generally available subsidy program indeed justice thomas claims funding provided virginia assessment extended christian sects ante clear bill general scope bill reprinted everson board ed ewing provided taxpayer designate religious society wanted levy paid also allowed taxpayer refuse appropriate levy religious society case legislature use unappropriated sums fund seminaries learning contrary justice thomas unsupported assertion portion bill less obligatory seminaries undoubtedly religious character others seminary generally understood time school academy college university young persons instructed several branches learning may qualify future employments webster american dictionary english language ed see also oxford english dictionary ed surprisingly scholars generally agreed bill provided funding nonreligious schools see laycock nonpreferential aid religion false claim original intent wm mary rev taxpayer refuse designate church undesignated church taxes going fund schools bill used phrase seminaries learning almost certainly meant schools generally schools training ministers buckley church state revolutionary rosenberger university virginia virginia assessment carefully drafted permit preferred support education rather religion curry first freedoms hose taxes designated specific denomination allocated education beside point system public education virginia several decades assessment bill proposed ante thomas concurring bill never passed funds made available secular public schools never materialized fact bill passed funded secular well religious instruction nothing soften madison opposition fair argue madison opposed bill treated religious groups unequally ante thomas concurring various paragraphs remonstrance madison complain bill peculiar burdens exemptions everson supra identify factor sole point madison opposition bill unfaithful remonstrance text madison strongly inveighed proposed aid religion host reasons remonstrance numbers paragraphs containing least one point opposition crucial fact many reasons applied whether state aid distributed equally among sects whether aid going sects context evenhanded government program see madison remonstrance reprinted everson matters religion man right abridged institution civil society religion wholly exempt cognizance arguing state support religion contradiction christian religion every page disavows dependence powers world xperience witnesseth ecclesiastical establishments instead maintaining purity efficacy religion contrary operation madison objections supplemented numerous petitions opposition bill likewise suggest lack evenhandedness dispositive flaw levy establishment clause ed example petition received largest number signatories motivated view religion supported voluntarily indeed madison remonstrance argue bill distributing aid sects religions equal basis outgrowth remonstrance defeat virginia assessment bill rather virginia bill establishing religious freedom discussed text proscribed use tax dollars religious purposes rosenberger university virginia attempting recast madison opposition principally targeted governmental preferences particular religious faiths ante emphasis original justice thomas wishes wage battle lost long ago rejected unequivocally contention establishment clause forbids governmental preference one religion another school dist abington schempp see also texas monthly bullock plurality opinion blackmun concurring judgment wallace jaffree torcaso watkins engel vitale everson supra see generally lee weisman souter concurring justice thomas attempts cast doubt accepted version establishment clause history reference historical facts largely inapposite ante concurring opinion said elsewhere individual acts congress especially far scarcely serve authoritative guide meaning religion clauses like politicians members early congresses raise constitutional ideals one day turn backs next example en years proposing first amendment congress passed alien sedition acts measures patently unconstitutional modern standards early congress political actions determinative merely relevant evidence constitutional meaning gut current first amendment doctrine make room political censorship lee weisman concurring opinion legislation cited justice thomas including northwest ordinance dispositive alien sedition acts interpreting first amendment even less persuasive citations constitutionally untested acts dating century without rather innovative argument offered providing authoritative gloss framers intent justice thomas references madison actions legislator rosenberger university virginia also provide little support cause justice thomas seeks draw significant lesson fact seeking disestablish anglican church virginia madison inveigh state funding religious activities ante concurring opinion task hand however madison acting specific goal eliminating special privileges enjoyed virginia anglicans made effort lay broader views church state came bear drafting first amendment years later madison speak expansive terms necessary hardly surprising proposal defeated virginia convention gone far ibid similarly invocation madison tenure congressional committee approved funding legislative chaplains provides support general principles run counter settled establishment clause jurisprudence previously pointed madison upon retirement insisted approbation deviation immunity religion civil jurisdiction took place appointed chaplains paid natl treasury lee supra quoting letter madison livingston july founders constitution turned attention deciding whether funding legislative chaplains posed establishment problem address practice one instance larger class permissible government funding religious activities instead marsh chambers explicitly relied singular pedigree legislative chaplains noting unique history justified carving exception specific practice question given decision upholding practice expressly limited facts stand establishment clause head extract broad rule permitting funding religious activities district parties agreed following facts university virginia charged times relevant herein currently charges student compulsory student activity fee per semester procedural mechanism student may decline pay fee app rosenberger university virginia see also app extent perceives distinction printing dissemination evangelism proselytization core religious activity usual sense ante distinction goes entirely unexplained opinion narrow band cases polar extreme direct funding cases involving essential public benefits commonly associated living organized society like police fire protection example evenhandedness may become important ensuring religious interests inhibited zobrest deaf student sought interpreter provided state act aiding individuals disabilities accompany roman catholic high school witters blind student sought use aid provided state program assistance handicapped persons attend private christian college mueller parents sought take tax deduction available parents public nonpublic schoolchildren certain expenses incurred connection providing education children private religious schools walz tax new york city yet another example case treated general availability government benefit significant condition defining compliance establishment clause deem condition sufficient upholding state property tax exemptions given religious organizations walz noted law issue applicable broad class property owned nonprofit corporations rest factor alone critical decision central principle direct funding religious activities prohibited establishment clause sufficient note men wrote religion clauses first amendment establishment religion connoted sponsorship rosenberger university virginia financial support active involvement sovereign religious activity emphasized tax exemptions involve expenditure government funds support religious activities grant tax exemption sponsorship since government transfer part revenue churches simply abstains demanding church support state moreover noted property taxation context exemption creat minimal remote involvement church state far less taxation churches operation ten complement reinforce desired separation insulating church state religious property tax exemptions place years without disruption interests represented establishment clause justice thomas assertion tax exemption many cases economically functionally indistinguishable direct monetary subsidy ante concurring opinion omitted assumes natural correct tax base provision excusing person institution taxes others subjected must departure natural tax base rather part definition tax base equivalence asserted justice thomas ante direct money subsidy tax liability avoided institution part class institutions defines relevant tax base exclusion tested dispatched long ago professor bittker churches taxes constitution yale justice thomas suggestion reliance bittker misplaced context ante point even granting justice thomas assertion equivalence reasonable deny fact walz explicitly distinguished tax exemptions direct money subsidies rested decision distinction justice thomas assertion equivalence prevail walz necessarily wrong distinction critical holding justice thomas hardly use walz coherently support removing basis relies although main opinion tilton plurality entire unanimous point see plurality opinion douglas joined black marshall concurring part dissenting part lemon kurtzman opinion brennan opinion white congress apparently also reads cases university routinely excludes religious activities general funding programs see federal grant program institutions higher education grant may made chapter educational program activity service related sectarian instruction religious worship provided school department divinity certain grants higher education institutions may used school department divinity religious worship sectarian activity supp federal assistance renovation certain academic facilities loan may made part educational program activity service related sectarian instruction religious worship provided school department divinity institution substantial portion functions subsumed religious mission grant program educational facilities project assisted funds subchapter shall ever used religious worship sectarian activity school department divinity grant may made chapter educational program activity service related sectarian instruction religious worship provided school department divinity supp funding indian higher education programs one funds made available subchapter may used study school department divinity religious worship sectarian activity grants projects activities rehabilitation handicapped persons funds provided subchapter may used assist construction facility used religious worship sectarian activity iv requiring seeking federal aid construction centers elderly submit plans providing assurances facilit ies used intended used sectarian instruction place religious worship supp federal grants support volunteer projects elderly including projects involving construction operation maintenance much facility used rosenberger university virginia used sectarian instruction place religious worship supp child care development block grants shall expended sectarian purpose activity including sectarian worship instruction acknowledges state pays church bills subsidizing concedes must guard abuse ante concerns present contends wide awake religious institution least usual sense term used case law ibid concession suggests distinction paying religious institution paying religious institution bills really significant relying characterization wide awake religious institution least usual sense presumably stop right draws distinction state use public funds advance speech state funding private speech suggesting authority make choices powerful state undertakes former ante argue otherwise see hazelwood school dist kuhlmeier suggest case reveals difficulties encountered drawing distinction communicative element inherent act funding cf buckley valeo per curiam although student speakers choose particular messages advance forum created university initial act defining boundaries forum decision attributable university students event even assuming private state speech always may separated clean lines case involves former believe distinction irrelevant discussed infra case involve viewpoint discrimination decide viewpoint discrimination public university funding determinations violate free speech clause however determinations made basis reasonable distinction viewpoint distinction violation forum speech restriction must reasonable light purpose served forum well lamb chapel slip quoting cornelius petitioners challenged university guideline unreasonable express opinion question whether reasonableness criterion applies speech funding cases manner applies forum cases see also tr oral arg lamb chapel center moriches rosenberger university virginia union free school counsel school district charged enforcing restriction unequivocally admitted anyone atheistic antireligious message permitted use school property rules forum complete exchange oral argument lamb chapel went follows question understand statement made earlier supposing communist group wanted address subject family values thought value children waste time going sunday school church therefore point view definitely antireligious permitted policy discuss family values context counsel yes yes honor correct question counsel earlier discussions indicated communists able give perspective family assume atheists able give rules counsel yes honor rosenberger university virginia