Belonging, choice, and the flourishing of young children
All eyes were on the Supreme Court last week as the Court finished a consequential term with decisions about executive authority and citizenship. I’ve also been watching a lawsuit about early education and religious liberty that’s headed for a Supreme Court hearing next term: St. Mary Catholic Parish v. Roy.
When this case comes into the spotlight in oral argument and decision phase, it will bring into public view questions of belonging, choice, and the flourishing of young children. For those working on child and family policy, this attention will present opportunities to build common ground as well as risks of deepening social fractures and polarization.
This edition of Hope& Practice, won’t tackle the legal arguments in St. Mary but rather focuses on the political cultures in which those arguments take shape. My aim is to help those who may disagree on how the case should be decided to keep talking about crucial and potentially shared aspirations: belonging, choice, and the flourishing of young children.
My topline considerations for those who want to engage St. Mary with a bridge-building posture are:
There’s a great deal of public support for religious practice, in general, which likely includes strong support for parents passing down their religious traditions to their children. Talking about a strict church-state separation when it comes to preschool may fall flat with many people.
Don’t assume that support for religious practice means warmth when religious practice conflicts with inclusion and anti-discrimination.
Don’t assume that secular or “public” means neutral. Listen for one another’s starting points and their reasons for preferring the educational models that they do.
Emphasize that a wide spectrum of parents - religious and non-religious – want to give their children great preschool and early learning spaces.
St. Mary Catholic Parish v. Roy
The St. Mary plaintiffs – two Catholic preschools, the Archdiocese of Denver, and two parents – are challenging a nondiscrimination provision of Colorado’s Universal Preschool program, claiming that the clause’s requirements restrict their religious liberty.
Cases like St. Mary have the capacity to drive a wedge between groups who incline toward religious liberty protection and those who champion universal programs such as preK. Litigation can transform complex and nuanced situations into flashpoints and zero-sum contests, both drawing on and exacerbating divisions in the wider political culture.
Is it possible to resist this pressure? I think so. The principles I summarized above and share in detail below may help us reclaim some nuance and resist polarization.
Americans are very supportive of the freedom to practice religion; they are less supportive of religious practice that clashes with anti-discrimination principles.
Speaking about this case in a register of strong church-state separation (“religion has no place in preschool”) is likely to fall flat with many audiences. According to a Religious Freedom Index published by the Becket Fund – which also represents the St. Mary plaintiffs - Americans widely favor the freedom to practice one’s faith. This sentiment likely extends to a family’s choice of a faith-based setting for preschool.
The same survey, however, revealed less warmth for religious practice when it conflicts with anti-discrimination principles and their enforcement.
The St. Mary plaintiffs want their preschool to receive public funding while also exempting the school from rules prohibiting discrimination in preschool enrollment on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. Americans are quite divided about this.
Secularism in education is not always perceived as neutral.
Although St. Mary is about a preschool program, it’s part of a history of disputes about religion and education in the United States. What a person perceives as neutral and natural depends on their distinct starting point in this history.
For some, the principle of church-state separation is the starting point and counsels establishing public schools that are secular. By this logic, everyone gains access to the same thing: a preschool program following the state’s best practices and policy commitments. To ensure all are welcome, religion should be kept out of the picture.
For others, the story begins in the 19th century when Protestant prayers and devotions were sometimes integrated into public schools. Catholics who perceived these Protestant-leaning public schools unwelcome to their faith opened their own schools and sought various forms of public aid to support them. From this perspective, secular schools were never neutral. Public aid to religious settings merely evens the playing field.
The view that secular public education is biased and non-neutral remains potent. For some, it surfaces in concerns that public schools are actively anti-religious or are seeking to disrupt the religious and moral formation parents are undertaking in their home.
What happens next
Amicus briefs on all sides of the case are piling up on the Supreme Court’s doorstep. Contrary to the typical fault lines, some of the briefs championing religious liberty also embrace universal preschool: they describe hard-working families, for example, who rely on Colorado’s preK program to meet their children’s needs. A brief submitted by the Attorney General of West Virginia and 21 state attorneys general in favor of St. Mary cites research on the long-term benefits of high quality early learning.
A throughline on all sides of this case: families want access to early education programs where their children experience belonging and can learn and thrive.
However the Court rules in St. Mary, the work of offering this benefit to children and families will need to continue. It will require discussions about resourcing programs, educator support, and quality standards – discussions that likely require engagement across the differences surfaced in St. Mary. To accomplish this work, stay grounded and stay curious. Keep listening to the wide array of families who are seeking the best for their children and how they talk about what they value and what their children need.
In hope,
Rachel
PS - A few great resources for following the St. Mary case:
From the SCOTUSblog: Kelsey Dallas’ seasoned reporting and commentary at SCOTUSblog will be worth reading.
From Foresight Law and Policy: This paper serves as a practical guide for education, government, and policy leaders seeking to understand how a major religious liberty case could reshape the relationship between religious organizations and publicly funded early childhood programs.