Arizona Christian School Tuition Organization v. Winn
Encyclopedia
Arizona Christian School Tuition Organization v. Winn, 09-987, was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States
. The case was consolidated with Gale Garriott, Director, Arizona Department of Revenue, Petitioner v. Kathleen M. Winn, et al. (09-991).
A group of Arizona taxpayers challenged a state law that provides tax credits to people who donate to school tuition organizations that in turn provide scholarships to students who want to attend private or religious schools. The taxpayers claimed a violation of the Establishment Clause. The District Court dismissed the case on the grounds that the taxpayers did not state a claim. The decision was reversed by the Ninth Circuit, which ruled that the respondents had standing to sue citing Flast v. Cohen
.
The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that the plaintiffs did not have standing to bring suit Writing for the majority, Justice Kennedy stated, “This Court has rejected the general proposition that an individual who has paid taxes has a ‘continuing, legally cognizable interest in ensuring that those funds are not used by the Government in a way that violates the Constitution.’” Ultimately, the Supreme Court found that any damages or harm claimed by the taxpayers by virtue of simply being a taxpayer would be pure speculation because the issue at hand was a tax credit and not a government expenditure. Justice Scalia filed a concurring opinion that was joined by Justice Thomas.
Justice Kagan, in her dissent, commented that, “cash grants and targeted tax breaks are means of accomplishing the same government objective- to provide financial support to select individuals or organizations,” she continued to argue that, “tax payers should be able to challenge the subsidy.” The dissent was joined by Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, and Sotomayor. Professor of political science at Fairleigh Dickinson University
, Bruce Peabody, pointed out that “the case brought out four dissents, a signal that those justices were prepared to decide the sustentative issue.” Equally, Peter Woolley, professor of political science and director of the PublicMind Poll, posited that, “in making this ruling on such narrow grounds, the court virtually guarantees that plaintiff in one guise or another will be back another day.”
’s PublicMind poll found that a majority (60%) of American voters believe that the tax credits support school choice for parents rather than religion. When the results were broken down, Democrats were more likely to indicate that they felt as if the tax credits support religion (32%) than Republicans (16%). Another interesting feature was that voters ages 30-44 (those most likely to have children) were more likely to believe that the tax credits support parents.
Supreme Court of the United States
The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest court in the United States. It has ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all state and federal courts, and original jurisdiction over a small range of cases...
. The case was consolidated with Gale Garriott, Director, Arizona Department of Revenue, Petitioner v. Kathleen M. Winn, et al. (09-991).
A group of Arizona taxpayers challenged a state law that provides tax credits to people who donate to school tuition organizations that in turn provide scholarships to students who want to attend private or religious schools. The taxpayers claimed a violation of the Establishment Clause. The District Court dismissed the case on the grounds that the taxpayers did not state a claim. The decision was reversed by the Ninth Circuit, which ruled that the respondents had standing to sue citing Flast v. Cohen
Flast v. Cohen
Flast v. Cohen, 392 U.S. 83 , was a United States Supreme Court case holding that a taxpayer has standing to sue the government to prevent an unconstitutional use of taxpayer funds....
.
The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that the plaintiffs did not have standing to bring suit Writing for the majority, Justice Kennedy stated, “This Court has rejected the general proposition that an individual who has paid taxes has a ‘continuing, legally cognizable interest in ensuring that those funds are not used by the Government in a way that violates the Constitution.’” Ultimately, the Supreme Court found that any damages or harm claimed by the taxpayers by virtue of simply being a taxpayer would be pure speculation because the issue at hand was a tax credit and not a government expenditure. Justice Scalia filed a concurring opinion that was joined by Justice Thomas.
Justice Kagan, in her dissent, commented that, “cash grants and targeted tax breaks are means of accomplishing the same government objective- to provide financial support to select individuals or organizations,” she continued to argue that, “tax payers should be able to challenge the subsidy.” The dissent was joined by Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, and Sotomayor. Professor of political science at Fairleigh Dickinson University
Fairleigh Dickinson University
Fairleigh Dickinson University is a private university founded as a junior college in 1942. It now has several campuses located in New Jersey, Canada, and the United Kingdom.-Description:...
, Bruce Peabody, pointed out that “the case brought out four dissents, a signal that those justices were prepared to decide the sustentative issue.” Equally, Peter Woolley, professor of political science and director of the PublicMind Poll, posited that, “in making this ruling on such narrow grounds, the court virtually guarantees that plaintiff in one guise or another will be back another day.”
Public Opinion
In a national poll, Fairleigh Dickinson UniversityFairleigh Dickinson University
Fairleigh Dickinson University is a private university founded as a junior college in 1942. It now has several campuses located in New Jersey, Canada, and the United Kingdom.-Description:...
’s PublicMind poll found that a majority (60%) of American voters believe that the tax credits support school choice for parents rather than religion. When the results were broken down, Democrats were more likely to indicate that they felt as if the tax credits support religion (32%) than Republicans (16%). Another interesting feature was that voters ages 30-44 (those most likely to have children) were more likely to believe that the tax credits support parents.