Missouri Supreme Court Upholds Financial Benefit to Religious College
The Missouri Supreme Court rejected a state constitutional challenge to government financial support of Saint Louis University's construction of a new arena.
SLU sought "tax increment financing" (TIF) from the City of St. Louis for the arena. The Missouri legislature had previously created the TIF mechanism which SLU asked the city to use on its behalf. The city granted SLU's request, passing the necessary ordinances. The Masonic Temple Association filed suit in federal court, alleging that the TIF ordinances would violate, among other things, the federal Constitution's Establishment Clause and Article IX, Section 8 of the Missouri Constitution, which restrains the power of the state to financially support religious schools. After that case was dismissed without prejudice, SLU and the city filed suit in state court, seeking a declaration that the TIF ordinances did not violate Article IX, Section 8 or the First Amendment's Establishment Clause.
The case reached the Missouri Supreme Court. In an opinion dated April 17, the court upheld the TIF ordinances.
Article IX, Section 8 of the Missouri Constitution forbids state and local governments from financially supporting schools "controlled by any religious creed, church or sectarian denomination whatever." The Masonic Temple Association argued that SLU is "controlled by" a religious creed, church, or sectarian denomination. On its website, SLU describes itself as follows: "Founded in 1818 as a Jesuit, Catholic university, SLU is motivated by the inspiration and values of the Judaeo-Christian tradition and is guided by the spiritual and intellectual ideals of the Society of Jesus, which promotes activities that apply this intellectual and ethical heritage to work for the good of society as a whole. The University welcomes individuals of all faiths and backgrounds."
The Missouri Supreme Court concluded that SLU is not controlled by a religious creed, church, or sectarian denomination. In reaching this conclusion, the court observed that an "independent, lay" board of trustees ultimately controls the university. Only nine of SLU's 42 trustees were Jesuits. The fact that SLU's president was a Jesuit was not dispositive. The court further observed that "[t]here was no allegation that SLU's Jesuit roots and appreciation for Jesuit philosophies demonstrably control[led] campus life." The court also declared that the school's mission "is education, not indoctrination."
Christian Legal Society's Center for Law & Religious Freedom filed a friend of the court brief urging the court to uphold the TIF ordinances. Carl Esbeck and Tim Belz were the principal drafters of the brief, and the Alliance Defense Fund provided financial support.
The Center for Law & Religious Freedom is proud to announce the release of The Center Blog. Point your web browser to http://religiousfreedom.blogspot.com to get fresh commentary on religious liberty and life posted by the Center's attorneys. Join the discussion by posting your comments to our blog.
You can also get the newest blog posts delivered to you by adding our blog feed to your web browser or a feed reader such as Google Reader, My Yahoo!, or Bloglines. Our feed is available at http://feeds.feedburner.com/centerblog.
We also invite you to add a link to The Center Blog to your blog or website, and to forward our blog address to others who would be interested in reading.
Back To Top
