# Article Text
The highest court in the United States has decided to take up St. Mary Catholic Parish v. Roy, a case involving religious freedom that questions whether Colorado can withhold public preschool funding from Catholic institutions due to their faith-based enrollment practices and operational guidelines.
This week saw the Court grant certiorari through an unsigned order with no recorded dissents, focusing its review on two specific questions from the petition filed in November 2025. Oral arguments are anticipated during the term beginning in October 2026.
Colorado voters gave their approval to Proposition EE in 2020, establishing dedicated revenue streams for voluntary universal preschool. Through the Early Childhood Act and accompanying
regulations, the state launched its UPK program, offering free preschool services initially at 15 hours weekly to families choosing from participating public, private, or faith-based facilities. The initiative aimed to broaden access and provide choice for all families through various provider options.
Participation in the program and receipt of public funding requires preschools to execute a nondiscrimination agreement. This agreement mandates providers to offer equal enrollment and service opportunities to children without regard to race, religious affiliation, sexual orientation, gender identity, income, disability, or other protected categories. While the program includes certain targeted preferences or exemptions for specific groups such as children of color, low-income families, those with disabilities, gender-nonconforming children, or LGBTQ+ families, the fundamental nondiscrimination requirement remains binding on all participants.
Catholic preschools under the Archdiocese of Denver’s oversight, including St. Mary Catholic Preschool in Littleton and Wellspring Catholic Academy/St. Bernadette’s in Lakewood, blend religious instruction with early childhood education. These institutions function as faith-centered communities where children engage in learning, prayer, and development alongside families who either share or respect fundamental Catholic teachings regarding faith, morality, sexuality, and gender. Traditional Catholic doctrine on biological sex, marriage, and gender identity informs their operational approach. Their enrollment policies generally require families to acknowledge support for these beliefs, with some policies addressing practical considerations like bathroom usage based on biological sex.
Colorado officials determined these practices conflict with the equal-opportunity requirement, specifically concerning sexual orientation, gender identity, and religious affiliation, since the schools cannot guarantee enrollment to families whose beliefs or identities contradict Catholic teaching. Consequently, approximately 30 Catholic preschools under the Archdiocese faced categorical exclusion, impacting more than 1,500 children and families. At least one facility shuttered completely, while others experienced dramatic enrollment declines approaching 20 percent in certain instances, compelling families to either pay privately or select non-Catholic alternatives.
The lawsuit filed in 2023 through the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty named as plaintiffs two parishes with their preschools, the Archdiocese, and parents Daniel and Lisa Sheley, who sought to utilize the benefit at a Catholic preschool. They alleged violations of the Free Exercise Clause.
The district court in 2024 conducted a bench trial and largely ruled in favor of the state regarding the nondiscrimination requirement, though it enjoined enforcement concerning religious affiliation based on certain program preferences. The court found no broader
constitutional violation under the First Amendment.
The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously affirmed for Colorado on September 30, 2025. The appeals court determined the regulation constitutes a neutral, generally applicable law under Employment Division v. Smith from 1990, thereby triggering rational-basis review, which the rule satisfied. The panel characterized Colorado’s methodology as an exemplary balance between nondiscrimination and religious accommodation efforts, distinguishing it from recent Supreme Court decisions including Trinity Lutheran, Espinoza, and Carson v. Makin, which prohibit explicit discrimination based on religious status in public benefit programs. The court found no evidence of anti-religious animus similar to that in Masterpiece Cakeshop.
The Tenth Circuit aligned with a minority position in a circuit split regarding when exemptions or discretionary authority compromise a law’s general applicability under Smith, concluding that Colorado’s secular exemptions and discretion did not undermine general
applicability.