From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
2004 United States Supreme Court case
Locke v. Davey Full case name Gary Locke , Governor of Washington, et al., Petitioners v. Joshua DaveyCitations 540 U.S. 712 (more )124 S. Ct. 1307; 158
L. Ed. 2d 1; 2004
U.S. LEXIS 1626; 72 U.S.L.W. 4206; 17 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 163
Prior On writ of cert. to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Davey v. Locke, 299 F.3d 748, 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 14461 (9th Cir. Wash., 2002) A Washington publicly funded scholarship program which excluded students pursuing a "degree in theology " does not violate the Free Exercise Clause .
Chief Justice
William Rehnquist
Associate Justices
John P. Stevens · Sandra Day O'Connor Antonin Scalia · Anthony Kennedy David Souter · Clarence Thomas Ruth Bader Ginsburg · Stephen Breyer
Majority Rehnquist, joined by Stevens, O'Connor, Kennedy, Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer Dissent Scalia, joined by Thomas Dissent Thomas U.S. Const. amend. I
Locke v. Davey[ 1] , 540 U.S. 712 (2004), is a United States Supreme Court decision upholding the constitutionality of a Washington publicly funded scholarship program which excluded students pursuing a "degree in devotional theology ." This case examined the "room.. between the two Religion Clauses", the Free Exercise Clause and the Establishment Clause .
Chief Justice William Rehnquist wrote the opinion of the court, with Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas dissenting.
Background
Davey enrolled in Northwest College and received a Promise Scholarship. But when he declared a double major in pastoral ministries and business management/administration, his scholarship was revoked.[ 2] Davey was given the opportunity to continue under the scholarship but without the pastoral ministries major, but he refused.
The scholarship
In 1999, the state of Washington legislature created a scholarship, the Promise Scholarship. The scholarships were for $1,125 per year and were funded through the State's general fund. They were available for qualified students who enrolled for "at least half time in an eligible postsecondary institution in the state of Washington", but excluded study in theology. This was because the Washington State Constitution's Blaine Amendment specifically states that "No public money or property shall be appropriated for or applied to any religious worship, exercise or instruction".[ 3]
The scholarship was available to any graduate of a Washington public or private high school . The student must be in the top 15%, receive a score of 1,200 or higher on the SAT , or score higher than a 27 on the American College Test . In addition, the student's family's income must be less than 135% of the median.
Holding
The statute was upheld.[ 1] The Court held that there was nothing "inherently constitutionally suspect" in the denial of funding for vocational religious instruction. Even if there were, Washington had a "substantial state interest" in not funding "devotional degrees."
See also
References
External links
Public displays and ceremonies Statutory religious exemptions Public funding Religion in public schools Private religious speech Internal church affairs Taxpayer standing Blue laws Other
Unprotected speech
Incitement and sedition Defamation andfalse speech Fighting words and the heckler's veto True threats Obscenity
Rosen v. United States (1896)
United States v. One Book Called Ulysses (S.D.N.Y. 1933)
Roth v. United States (1957)
One, Inc. v. Olesen (1958)
Smith v. California (1959)
Marcus v. Search Warrant (1961)
MANual Enterprises, Inc. v. Day (1962)
Jacobellis v. Ohio (1964)
Quantity of Books v. Kansas (1964)
Ginzburg v. United States (1966)
Memoirs v. Massachusetts (1966)
Redrup v. New York (1967)
Ginsberg v. New York (1968)
Stanley v. Georgia (1969)
United States v. Thirty-seven Photographs (1971)
Kois v. Wisconsin (1972)
Miller v. California (1973)
Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton (1973)
United States v. 12 200-ft. Reels of Film (1973)
Jenkins v. Georgia (1974)
Southeastern Promotions, Ltd. v. Conrad (1975)
Erznoznik v. City of Jacksonville (1975)
Young v. American Mini Theatres, Inc. (1976)
Vance v. Universal Amusement Co., Inc. (1980)
American Booksellers Ass'n, Inc. v. Hudnut (7th Cir. 1985)
People v. Freeman (Cal. 1988)
United States v. X-Citement Video, Inc. (1994)
Reno v. ACLU (1997)
United States v. Playboy Entertainment Group, Inc. (2000)
City of Los Angeles v. Alameda Books, Inc. (2002)
Ashcroft v. ACLU I (2002)
United States v. American Library Ass'n (2003)
Ashcroft v. ACLU II (2004)
Nitke v. Gonzales (S.D.N.Y. 2005)
United States v. Williams (2008)
American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression v. Strickland (6th Cir. 2009)
United States v. Kilbride (9th Cir. 2009)
United States v. Stevens (2010)
Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Ass'n (2011)
FCC v. Fox Television Stations, Inc. (2012)
Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton (2025)
Speech integral to criminal conduct
Strict scrutiny Overbreadth Vagueness Symbolic speech versus conductContent-based restrictions Content-neutral restrictions
Compelled speech Compelled subsidy of others' speech
Government grants and subsidies Government as speaker Loyalty oaths School speech Public employees Hatch Act and similar lawsLicensing and restriction of speech Commercial speech
Valentine v. Chrestensen (1942)
Rowan v. U.S. Post Office Dept. (1970)
Pittsburgh Press Co. v. Pittsburgh Comm'n on Human Relations (1973)
Lehman v. Shaker Heights (1974)
Goldfarb v. Virginia State Bar (1975)
Bigelow v. Virginia (1975)
Virginia State Pharmacy Bd. v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council (1976)
Linmark Assoc., Inc. v. Township of Willingboro (1977)
Carey v. Population Services International (1977)
Bates v. State Bar of Arizona (1977)
In re Primus (1978)
Ohralik v. Ohio State Bar Association (1978)
Friedman v. Rogers (1979)
Consol. Edison Co. v. Public Serv. Comm'n (1980)
Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public Service Commission (1980)
Metromedia, Inc. v. San Diego (1981)
In re R.M.J. (1982)
Hoffman Estates v. The Flipside, Hoffman Estates, Inc. (1982)
Zauderer v. Off. of Disciplinary Counsel of Supreme Court of Ohio (1985)
Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. Public Utilities Comm'n of California (1986)
Posadas de Puerto Rico Assoc. v. Tourism Co. of Puerto Rico (1986)
San Francisco Arts & Athletics, Inc. v. U.S. Olympic Committee (1987)
Shapero v. Kentucky Bar Association (1988)
Riley v. Nat'l Fed'n of the Blind (1988)
State University of New York v. Fox (1989)
Peel v. Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission of Illinois (1990)
City of Cincinnati v. Discovery Network (1993)
Edenfield v. Fane (1993)
United States v. Edge Broadcasting Co. (1993)
Ibanez v. Florida Dept. of Business and Professional Regulation, Bd. of Accountancy (1994)
Lebron v. National Railroad Passenger Corp. (1995)
Rubin v. Coors Brewing Co. (1995)
Florida Bar v. Went For It, Inc. (1995)
44 Liquormart, Inc. v. Rhode Island (1996)
Glickman v. Wileman Brothers & Elliot, Inc. (1997)
Greater New Orleans Broadcasting Assn., Inc. v. United States (1999)
Los Angeles Police Department v. United Reporting Publishing Co. (1999)
United States v. United Foods Inc. (2001)
Lorillard Tobacco Co. v. Reilly (2001)
Thompson v. Western States Medical Center (2002)
Nike, Inc. v. Kasky (2003)
Johanns v. Livestock Marketing Ass'n (2005)
Tennessee Secondary School Athletic Assn. v. Brentwood Academy (2007)
Milavetz, Gallop & Milavetz, P.A. v. United States (2010)
Jerman v. Carlisle, McNellie, Rini, Kramer & Ulrich LPA (2010)
Sorrell v. IMS Health Inc. (2011)
Expressions Hair Design v. Schneiderman (2017)
Matal v. Tam (2017)
Iancu v. Brunetti (2019)
Barr v. American Association of Political Consultants (2020)
Vidal v. Elster (2024)
Campaign finance and political speechAnonymous speech State action Official retaliation Boycotts Prisons
Organizations Future Conduct Solicitation Membership restriction Primaries and elections