A recent Supreme Court decision that upheld states' rights todeny theology students state scholarship money based solely ontheir major has some University of Memphis students concerned.
"(The court's decision) doesn't add up," said Matt Putnam,freshman English major. "If you meet all the requirements for thescholarship, it shouldn't matter what your major is."
Campus minister Brenda Kindelan of the University CatholicCenter agreed.
"I do not think this scholarship goes against the separation ofchurch and state," she said. "This scholarship was an academicscholarship to pay for the supplementary expenses of highereducation. He should not be penalized because he wants to become aminister."
The Locke vs. Davey ruling was passed by a 7-2 vote last monthafter Joshua Davey, a Northwest College student, sued the state ofWashington for pulling his $1,125 state-funded scholarship becauseof his theology major.
"I was being told my (college) major was not important, itdidn't matter and that the state wouldn't waste its money on it,"Davey told CNN in December.
Although Davey met all the academic requirements for theneed-based scholarship, Washington's state constitution forbidsallocating state funds for "religious training."
The Supreme Court said such state amendments -- also known asBlaine Amendments -- are constitutional because they upholdseparation of church and state. About 37 state constitutionsinclude Blaine Amendments. Tennessee is among the states withoutthem.
"Given the historic and substantial state interest at issue, wetherefore cannot conclude the denial of funding for vocationalreligious instruction alone is constitutionally suspect," ChiefJustice William Rehnquist said in a statement on behalf of theruling majority.
Critics of the landmark decision say the ruling raises questionsabout the power of the Supreme Court to maintain policies on theseparation of church and state, as well as discourages White Housecampaigns advocating greater faith-based initiatives at the statelevel.
However, the decision does not prevent students from enrollingin religion-based courses. It only allows states to refuse fundingto students pursuing future careers in ministry.
Despite the ruling's limited effects on local students enrolledin religious programs, some at The U of M say the Supreme Courtfailed to protect freedom of religion by ruling against Davey.
Graduate education major Antwain Jamison said the decision was"blatant discrimination."
"You're endorsing a scholarship to a student who needs money --not a particular religion," Jamison said.
