[et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ _builder_version=”4.0.6″ custom_padding=”0px||13px|||”][et_pb_row _builder_version=”4.0.6″][et_pb_column type=”4_4″ _builder_version=”4.0.6″][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.0.6″ hover_enabled=”0″]<\/p>\n
This week, the Supreme Court heard arguments in Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue \u2013 a case that may have major implications for the free exercise of religion and the future of school choice and public education. The lawsuit asks whether Montana violated the federal constitution when it terminated a program that gave tax breaks to people who donated to a scholarship fund, which was used by students attending both religious and secular private schools. Our guests explain the technicalities of the case, and how it squares with some of the Court\u2019s key decisions on the separation of church and state. Host Jeffrey Rosen is joined by Michael Bindas \u2013 a senior attorney with the Institute for Justice (IJ), the group representing the parents who filed suit after the program was terminated \u2013 and Alice O\u2019Brien \u2013 General Counsel at the National Education Association (NEA), who\u2019s written about the case for SCOTUSblog.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\n