In Wolman v. Walter, Justice Stevens voiced concem that the "'high and impregnable' wall between church and state, has been reduced to a 'blurred, indistinct, and variable barrier.' 2 The court had sacrificed predictability for flexibility? While this may be true in some areas of Establishment Clause jurisprudence, it is no longer true in cases involving benefits to religious organizations. If the programs equally benefit both secular and "similarly situated" religious organizations, there is no violation of the Establishment Clause.4 Jackson v. Benson is an expression of this view. The Wisconsin Supreme Court, in upholding a program designed to provide tuition money to students attending private schools, followed the United States Supreme Court's most recent expressions in this area and reached a result that it felt was in accord with the Court's present view of the Establishment Clause. It appears that the Wisconsin court was right, for the Supreme Court recently decided not to grant certiorar

Included in

Law Commons



To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.