My legal expertise needs to be applied in Garriot v. Winn.
Arizona grants a dollar for dollar tax break to citizens who donate to school scholarships. The case is arriving at the Supremes via the avenue of religious freedom.
Before this discussion develops, let me point something out right away, the three way trade. Citizens pay for schooling, funded schools provide a service required by government, government then pays citizen the amount spent. Government is the default provider of education products, and citizens are required by law to buy some quota of educational products from acceptable sources, government or private.
Not quite libertarian, but I see no Due Process violation, no bias.
So the plaintiff here has a high burden of proof, since there is no obvious Due Process wrong, nor claim of any, and no dispute with the legal requirement to fund education. How do they get religious freedom? If some religious schools are improperly qualified, then exclude them. But we cannot have a blanket exclusion of educational products produced by religious sects.
Case Dismissed.
No comments:
Post a Comment