A group of taxpayers claimed that federal funds were unconstitutionally being dispersed under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. The Act permitted the use of public funds to go towards instructional and material expenses for both sectarian and religious schools in low-income areas. At issue before the Supreme Court was whether their status as taxpayers gave the petitioners standing to sue in federal courts.
The Court ruled that the taxpayers could sue the federal government if its spending violated a specific limitation on its power.
| Majority Opinion: (Chief Justice Warren) |
Two criteria must be met by people who want to use their status as taxpayers to gain standing to sue an act of the federal government. First, the type of legislation in question must directly involve the expenditure of funds. A regulatory law cannot be challenged. Also, the taxpayers must show that the congressional spending exceeded a specific limitation on their power. Both of these stipulations are met by the petitioners in this case.
This decision weakened an earlier ruling in Frothingham v. Mellon that many believed prevented people from claiming taxpayer status to gain standing to sue the federal government. Following this decision, people could challenge expenditures by Congress provided the two conditions laid out in this case were met.
Copyright © The Religious Freedom Page.
|
