US Supreme Court Takes On LGBTQ Battle Over Colorado Preschools and Public Funds
A high-stakes legal showdown is brewing at the nation's highest court. According to a report by USA Today, the US Supreme Court is poised to take up yet another significant LGBTQ rights case. This time, the dispute centers on Catholic preschools in Colorado that were excluded from the state's tuition-free universal preschool program because they refused to admit children from LGBTQ families. The case, formally known as St. Mary Catholic Parish v. Roy, has drawn national attention from religious liberty advocates, LGBTQ rights groups, and legal scholars alike. At its core, this battle asks a simple but explosive question: can a religious school take public money and still turn away kids based on their parents' identity?
Understanding LGBTQ: What the Term Really Means
For those unfamiliar with the term, LGBTQ+ stands for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer (or Questioning), with the plus sign representing other sexual orientations and gender identities not explicitly covered by the initial letters. In the United States, LGBTQ+ rights have been a deeply contested area of law and public policy for decades. From marriage equality to adoption rights, and now to questions about education access, the legal battles involving the LGBTQ+ community continue to reach the highest levels of the American judicial system. As CNN has reported, the Supreme Court's conservative supermajority has repeatedly sided against LGBTQ rights across a range of cases in recent years, making every new case before the court a closely watched event. This preschool case in Colorado is the latest chapter in that ongoing national conversation.
What Is Colorado's Universal Preschool Program?
Colorado voters approved Proposition EE back in 2020, which created a dedicated source of public funding for a voluntary, universal preschool program. The Colorado General Assembly then passed the Early Childhood Act and established the Colorado Department of Early Childhood to run the program. Under this setup, both public and private preschools can receive state funds. The program, known as Universal Preschool Colorado (UPK), is built around the idea that every child in the state deserves access to quality early education. It currently serves more than 40,000 children across Colorado and is valued at approximately $349 million. It covers 15 hours of free preschool per week for children in the year before kindergarten. More than 2,000 preschools participate in the program today, including many private and religious schools.
Why Were These Catholic Preschools Left Out?
Two Denver-area Catholic schools, St. Mary Catholic Virtue School in Littleton and Wellspring Catholic Academy in Lakewood, wanted to join the UPK program when it launched. However, they were unwilling to comply with the program's nondiscrimination rules. Those rules require participating schools to give all eligible children an equal opportunity to enroll, regardless of race, ethnicity, religious affiliation, sexual orientation, gender identity, or housing status. The Archdiocese of Denver, which oversees the schools, instructs its preschools not to admit students if the family does not agree with the Catholic Church's teachings on biological sex and marriage. Because the schools would not commit to admitting children from LGBTQ families, the state excluded them from the program. The schools never joined UPK. Then in August 2023, the parishes filed a federal lawsuit against Colorado.
The Lawsuit and What the Courts Said
The plaintiffs in the case include St. Mary Catholic Parish in Littleton, St. Bernadette Catholic Parish in Lakewood, the Archdiocese of Denver, and a Catholic family named the Sheleys. They argued that Colorado's nondiscrimination requirement violates their First Amendment rights, specifically their right to freely exercise their religion. The district court held a three-day bench trial and ruled against the Catholic parishes. The Denver-based 10th US Circuit Court of Appeals then affirmed that decision on September 30, 2025, in a unanimous three-judge panel ruling. The appeals court described Colorado's program as a model example of maintaining neutral and generally applicable nondiscrimination laws while trying to accommodate the exercise of religious beliefs. Judge Federico, writing for the panel, stated clearly that when a school takes money from the state meant to ensure universal education, its doors must be open to all.
The Becket Fund Steps In
The Catholic preschools are being represented by the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, a prominent nonprofit legal organization known for taking on high-profile religious freedom cases. The Becket Fund argues that Colorado is discriminating against the preschools purely because of their religious beliefs. Nick Reaves, senior counsel at the Becket Fund, pointed out that over 2,000 preschools participate in the UPK program, including many private and other religious institutions. He argued that Colorado has singled out only a small number of faith-based preschools with specific religious beliefs that the state disagrees with. Reaves also pushed back on the idea that this has to be a "win-lose scenario," suggesting that allowing these schools into the program would simply create more seats for families across Colorado. In November 2025, the Becket Fund filed a petition asking the US Supreme Court to take up the case. The justices held a private conference on April 17, 2026, to consider whether to grant review.
Trump Administration Jumps In Uninvited
One of the most striking aspects of this case is the role of the Trump administration. The Justice Department filed what is known as an "uninvited amicus brief," meaning it weighed in on the case without being asked by the justices. This is a relatively rare move. According to SCOTUSblog, since 1995, the federal government has filed only about 23 such uninvited briefs at the petition stage, an average of fewer than one per year over 31 years. The Trump administration has now filed five of those in just the last 13 months. US Solicitor General D. John Sauer explained this approach by saying the brief reflects the government's view about the severity of the lower court's error and the significant benefit that clarity in this area of the law would provide. The administration argued that Colorado's nondiscrimination rule is not truly neutral and generally applicable because the state permits schools to make admissions preferences for non-religious reasons, such as prioritizing low-income children or children with disabilities, but refuses the same flexibility to religious schools.
The Central Legal Question: Employment Division v. Smith
The legal heart of this case revolves around a landmark 1990 Supreme Court decision called Employment Division v. Smith. That ruling established that government actions generally do not violate the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment as long as the law in question is neutral and applies equally to everyone. The Catholic preschools asked the Supreme Court to take up three questions, including whether Employment Division v. Smith should be outright overruled. The Trump administration took a narrower position, asking the court to focus only on whether Colorado's law truly qualifies as neutral and generally applicable. If the court answers that question, the administration argued, it would not need to decide whether to overturn the 1990 precedent altogether. This is a strategically cautious approach, and it signals that the Trump administration wants a win on the facts of this case without opening the door to broader legal upheaval.
Colorado's Defense of Its Nondiscrimination Rules
Colorado's legal team has defended its position vigorously. The state argues that UPK does not exclude religious schools at all. In fact, the program actively welcomed faith-based institutions, and approximately 40 religious preschools currently participate in it. The state's position is that the nondiscrimination requirement applies to all participating schools equally, whether religious or secular. What matters is not the school's religious character but whether it complies with the equal opportunity mandate. Colorado also rejected the comparison to other admissions preferences. The 10th Circuit put it plainly: allowing schools to prioritize low-income or disabled children is not the same as allowing them to turn away children of gay parents. The former serves a specific educational need; the latter is discrimination. Colorado Governor Jared Polis applauded the appeals court's September 2025 ruling as a major win for the state. A spokesperson for the Colorado Department of Early Childhood declined to comment on the pending litigation.
The Real-World Impact Already Being Felt
This legal battle is not just abstract. It has already had real consequences for families. The Becket Fund has noted that at least one Catholic preschool that primarily served low-income families had to close during the course of this litigation. Families who send their children to Catholic preschools are being forced into a difficult financial choice: pay out-of-pocket for Catholic early education on top of the taxes they already contribute to the state program, or pull their kids from Catholic school entirely. This burden falls hardest on middle and lower-income Colorado families. Meanwhile, the broader Catholic community in Denver is watching closely. The Archdiocese oversees 36 preschools, many of which serve families who deeply value both quality early education and formation in the Catholic faith. For these families, the case is deeply personal. US Supreme Court rulings on religious liberty have consistently shaped the daily lives of millions of American families, and this case looks set to be no different.
Colorado's Track Record at the Supreme Court
Colorado has not had a great run at the Supreme Court on First Amendment issues in recent years. The Becket Fund's Nick Reaves pointed this out directly, noting a string of defeats for the state at the highest level over the past decade. In 2018, the Supreme Court ruled against Colorado in Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, a case involving a Christian baker who refused to make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple. In 2023, the court sided with a Christian web designer in 303 Creative v. Elenis, another Colorado case involving LGBTQ nondiscrimination laws. Just recently in March 2026, the court ruled 8-1 against Colorado's ban on so-called "conversion therapy" for LGBTQ minors in Chiles v. Salazar. As CNN reported in its coverage of that ruling, the court found that Colorado's therapy law amounted to clear viewpoint discrimination under the First Amendment. If the Supreme Court agrees to take up the preschool case, Colorado would find itself in familiar territory defending yet another First Amendment challenge.
21 Friend-of-the-Court Briefs Supporting the Preschools
Beyond the Trump administration's uninvited brief, the Catholic preschools have attracted enormous support from outside groups. A total of 21 amicus briefs were filed in support of the schools' petition for Supreme Court review. Those groups range from the US Conference of Catholic Bishops to a large coalition of states led by West Virginia. The sheer volume of outside support signals how seriously the broader religious liberty community views this case. Many of these groups believe that a decision in the preschools' favor could create important precedent protecting faith-based organizations that participate in government programs while maintaining their religious identity and values. For them, this is not just about a handful of preschools in Colorado. It is about whether religious institutions across America can participate in public benefit programs without being forced to abandon core beliefs.
What Happens If the Supreme Court Takes the Case?
If the Supreme Court agrees to hear the case, oral arguments would most likely be scheduled during the court's next term, which begins in October 2026 and runs through June 2027. The court's conservative 6-3 supermajority has repeatedly demonstrated a willingness to side with religious liberty claims in recent years, so the outcome is far from guaranteed for Colorado. Should the justices rule in favor of the Catholic preschools, the implications could extend far beyond Colorado. Other states with similar nondiscrimination requirements attached to public education funding would face serious legal challenges. More broadly, a ruling could reshape how state and federal governments design benefit programs that include religious institutions, creating a new framework for the relationship between public dollars and private religious practice.
The Bigger Picture: LGBTQ Rights at the Supreme Court in 2026
This preschool case is just one piece of a much larger mosaic of LGBTQ-related battles currently playing out at the Supreme Court. The justices are expected to hand down major decisions later in 2026 on whether states can ban transgender students from playing on sports teams that align with their gender identity. During oral arguments in those cases earlier this year, a majority of the court appeared ready to uphold such bans. In November 2025, the court allowed the Trump administration to require sex designations on US passports to align with a traveler's biological sex. Last June, the court upheld a Tennessee law banning puberty blockers and hormone therapy for transgender minors. It is a period of significant legal uncertainty for LGBTQ Americans, and the preschool case adds yet another front to an already crowded and consequential docket.
Why This Case Could Be a Landmark
Legal experts are watching St. Mary Catholic Parish v. Roy closely because it sits at the intersection of three of the most contested areas of American constitutional law: religious liberty, LGBTQ rights, and the use of public funds for private education. The Supreme Court's 2022 decision in Carson v. Makin already held that states cannot exclude religious schools from public benefit programs simply because of their religious character. The question now is whether that protection extends to situations where religious schools are excluded not for what they are, but for what they do, specifically their admissions practices rooted in religious belief. The answer to that question could have enormous consequences for religious schools, LGBTQ families, and the design of publicly funded education programs across the entire country.
What to Watch For Next
The Supreme Court's justices discussed the petition during their private conference on April 17, 2026. A decision on whether to grant certiorari could come as soon as Monday, April 21, at 9:30 a.m. EDT. If the court grants review, it will be one of the most closely watched cases of the 2026-2027 term. If it declines, the 10th Circuit's ruling upholding Colorado's nondiscrimination requirement will stand. Either way, this case has already sparked a national conversation about where the line sits between protecting religious freedom and protecting children and families from discrimination. That conversation is only going to get louder as the Supreme Court prepares to issue what could be a generation-defining ruling on the intersection of faith, family, and public funds in America.
Source & AI Information: External links in this article are provided for informational reference to authoritative sources. This content was drafted with the assistance of Artificial Intelligence tools to ensure comprehensive coverage, and subsequently reviewed by a human editor prior to publication.
0 Comments