美国最高法院将于周二就一起诉讼进行辩论，该诉讼由科罗拉多州的两所天主教幼儿园提起，主张尽管它们拒绝接收LGBTQ+父母的孩子，但应被纳入该州的免费教育体系。
The US supreme court will hear arguments on Tuesday over a challenge brought by two Catholic preschools in Colorado, arguing that they should be admitted to the state’s free education system despite their rejection of children with LGBTQ+ parents.
此案“圣玛丽天主教堂诉罗伊案”的判决可能重塑美国宗教自由与反歧视法之间的关系。
A decision in the case, St Mary Catholic Parish v Roy, could reshape the relationship between religious freedom and nondiscrimination laws in the US.
这两所天主教幼儿园声称，它们被排除在2023年一项州资助项目之外，该项目提供每周15小时的州资助学前教育，并希望获得同等待遇。科罗拉多州表示，这些学校“依然欢迎参加”该项目，但前提是它们必须同意遵守适用于所有其他公共资助幼儿园（无论公立或私立、世俗或宗教）的同等机会要求。
The Catholic preschools claim that they been shut out of a 2023 state funding program that provides 15 hours per week of state-funded preschool and want the same benefits extended to them. Colorado says that the schools “remain welcome to participate in” the program but only if they agree to the same equal-opportunity requirements that apply to all other publicly funded preschools–public and private, secular and religious”.
科罗拉多州称，要加入该项目，学校必须同意“为符合条件的儿童提供平等的入学和接受学前教育服务的机会，不分种族、族裔、宗教信仰、性取向、性别认同、无住房状况、收入水平或残疾情况”。
But to join the program, Colorado says, the schools must consent to “provide eligible children an equal opportunity to enroll and receive preschool services regardless of race, ethnicity, religious affiliation, sexual orientation, gender identity, lack of housing, income level, or disability”.
原告辩称，将资助以接受该协议为条件，根据保障宗教自由的第一修正案，构成非法的宗教歧视。
The plaintiffs argue that making funding contingent on accepting that agreement amounts to unlawful religious discrimination under the first amendment guaranteeing religious freedoms.
此案实质上是宗教自由与反歧视法的冲突，已逐级上诉。下级上诉法院判决州政府胜诉，但承认最高法院先前曾裁定，各州“不能绝对地将这些资金从宗教机构中扣留”。
The case – in essence a clash between religious freedom and non-discrimination laws – has been making its way up the court system. A lower appeals court ruled for the state but acknowledged that the highest court has previously held that states “cannot categorically withhold those funds from religious institutions”.
在下级法院看来，前述判例不适用于本案，因为科罗拉多州“并未将”宗教幼儿园排除在其资助项目之外，反而“欢迎并积极征求它们的参与”。
In the lower court’s view, the rulings do not apply to the current case because Colorado “did not exclude” religious preschools from its funding program and had “welcomed and actively solicited their participation”.
总教区声称，该州允许参与的幼儿园“歧视性地偏向LGBTQ家庭和其他群体”，例如“性别不顺从儿童”、“有色人种儿童”或“LGBTQ群体成员”。
The archdiocese claims that the state allows participating preschools “to discriminate in favor of LGBTQ families and other groups”, such as “gender-nonconforming children”, “children of color”, or members of “the LGBTQ community”.
为宗教自由诉讼的贝克特基金会律师尼古拉斯·里夫斯告诉《国家天主教报道》，科罗拉多州“剥夺了家庭……在天主教幼儿园使用该资金的能力，仅仅因为这些幼儿园持有该州不喜欢的宗教信仰”。
Nicholas Reaves, counsel at the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, a firm that litigates religious liberty cases, told the National Catholic Reporter that Colorado had “denied families … the ability to use that funding at Catholic preschools, simply because those preschools have religious beliefs the state doesn’t like”.
美国天主教主教会议在提交法院的法庭之友简报中辩称，科罗拉多州让这些幼儿园失去资格“仅仅因为它们坚持天主教教义”。
In an amicus brief submitted to the court, the US Conference of Catholic Bishops argues that Colorado had disqualified the preschools “solely because of their adherence to Catholic doctrine”.
该会议表示，下级法院的裁决“将鼓励其他州和市镇通过表面中立实则歧视的法规，来歧视宗教信徒的权利”。
The lower court’s decision, the conference said, “will embolden other states and municipalities to discriminate against religious adherents’ rights by enacting ostensibly neutral statutes that discriminate in fact”.
该会议补充称，如果允许该裁决维持原状，“对国家社会支持基础设施造成的伤害将是巨大的”。
If allowed to stand, it added, “the resulting harm to the nation’s social support infrastructure would be immense.”