Does a state violate the Religion Clauses or Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution by prohibiting students participating in an otherwise generally available student-aid program from choosing to use their aid to attend schools that provide religious, or 'sectarian,' instruction?

QUESTION PRESENTED In Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue, 140 S. Ct. 2246 (2020), this Court held that a state may not exclude families and schools from participating in a student-aid program because of a school’s religious status. This Court acknowledged, but did not resolve, the question of whether a state may nevertheless exclude families and schools based on the religious use to which a student’s aid might be put at a school. In the decision below, the First Circuit upheld a religious exclusion in Maine’s tuition assistance program on the ground that the exclusion does not bar students from choosing to attend schools with a religious status, but rather bars them from using their aid to attend schools that provide religious, or “sectarian,” instruction. The question presented is: Does a state violate the Religion Clauses or Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution by prohibiting students participating in an otherwise generally available student-aid program from choosing to use their aid to attend schools that provide religious, or “sectarian,” instruction?