by Michele Jackson

Created on: June 28, 2007   Last Updated: June 29, 2007

In a 5 to 4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on June 25, 2007, that federal taxpayers from a group of atheists and agnostics have no legal standing to challenge the constitutionality of White House efforts to help religious groups obtain federal grants for their social programs. In the case Hein v. Freedom from Religion Foundation the closely divided Supreme Court overturned a federal appeals court decision and handed a victory to President George Bush's faith-based initiatives program.

President Bush, by executive orders, created a White House office and several centers within federal agencies to ensure that faith-based community groups are eligible to compete for federal financial support. No congressional legislation specifically authorized these entities, which were created entirely within the Executive Branch, nor has congress enacted any law specifically appropriating money to their activities, which are funded through general Executive Branch appropriations.

The Freedom from Religion Foundation said that the Executive Branch faith-based initiative policy violated the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment prohibition on the establishment of religion. The Foundation argued that a 1968 case, Flast v. Cohen, applied to their lawsuit. In Flast, the Supreme Court ruled that federal taxpayers could sue when the U.S. Congress provided financial aid to schools that promote religion.

However, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, who wrote for the Court majority, said that the Flast decision does not apply to the Foundation lawsuit. He wrote, "It has long been established that the payment of taxes is generally not enough to establish standing to challenge an action taken by the federal government."

"If every federal taxpayer could sue to challenge any government expenditure, the federal courts would cease to function as courts of law and would be cast in the role of general complaint bureaus," Justice Alito wrote.

The Supreme Court justices were asked to determine if taxpayers had standing to sue. The Court did not address the merits of the Freedom from Religion Foundation's lawsuit.

Some of the faith-based initiatives funded are programs for substance abuse treatment, housing for AIDS patients, community re-entry for inmates, housing for homeless veterans and emergency food assistance.

A sizable amount of money is spent on faith-based initiatives. According to a White House report, in fiscal 2005, seven federal agencies awarded $2.1 billion to religious charities.

Justices Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy and John Roberts wrote the opinion for the majority. The opinion did not overturn Flast. Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas concurred with the majority opinion but said that Flast should be overturned. Justices David Souter, John Paul Stevens, Ruth Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer dissented from the majority opinion. Justice Souter wrote, "When executive agencies spend identifiable sums of tax money for religious purposes, no less than when Congress authorizes the same thing, taxpayers suffer injury."

Learn more about this author, Michele Jackson.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.