Summary
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed dismissal of Bethany M. Hall’s First Amendment free exercise challenge to Virginia’s Tuition Assistance Grant Program. The court held that Locke v. Davey remains controlling and was not abrogated by Trinity Lutheran, Espinoza, or Carson. Judge Richardson concurred, arguing that Locke was wrongly decided and should be formally overruled by the Supreme Court, but agreeing that the Fourth Circuit was bound to apply it.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Virginia's exclusion of students pursuing religious-vocation majors from the Virginia Tuition Assistance Grant Program violates the First Amendment Free Exercise Clause.
- Whether Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia, Inc. v. Comer, Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue, and Carson ex rel. O.C. v. Makin abrogated or overruled Locke v. Davey.
- Whether a lower federal court may treat a Supreme Court precedent as implicitly overruled when later Supreme Court decisions have narrowed or undermined its reasoning.
Holdings
- The Virginia Tuition Assistance Grant Program's exclusion of funding for students pursuing religious-vocation majors does not violate the First Amendment Free Exercise Clause because Locke v. Davey directly controls the materially indistinguishable claim.
- A lower federal court must follow Locke because the Supreme Court has not expressly overruled it, and lower courts may not disregard a directly controlling Supreme Court precedent based on perceived inconsistency with later decisions.
Key quotations
“Based on the foregoing, we disagree with Hall and hold that the Supreme Court has yet to either overrule or abandon its decision in Locke through Trinity Lutheran, Espinoza, or Carson.” (10)
“And as a lower court, we must “follow the case which directly controls, leaving to [the Supreme] Court the prerogative of overruling its own decisions.”” (11)
“But until the Court formally buries Locke, we lower-court judges must keep applying it.” (18)
Factual background
Hall, a Virginia resident and full-time undergraduate at Liberty University, initially qualified for a $5,000 Virginia Tuition Assistance Grant. After changing her major first to Youth Ministries and then to Music & Worship, both classified as religious-training or theological-education programs under CIP Code 39, she became ineligible for the grant. Virginia's program permits funding at religious colleges and permits some double majors involving an ineligible religious major, but excludes funding when the student's program is a religious-vocation major.
Procedural history
Hall sued Fleming in federal district court after losing eligibility for Virginia Tuition Assistance Grants when she changed her major to religious-vocation programs classified under CIP Code 39. The district court held that Locke v. Davey controlled and dismissed the claim with prejudice. The Fourth Circuit affirmed on appeal.