The LA Times discusses the Hein vs. Freedom From Religion Foundation case, which the Supreme Court will consider next Wednesday February 28. At issue is whether taxpayers can sue over federal funding that the foundation perceives to promote religion. This could be a significant ruling in regards to the separation of church and state. The Bush administration is requesting that the case is thrown out, claiming that taxpayers have no legal interest in how the executive branch spends public money.

If the court grants the administration's request, it will eliminate what is often the only effective mechanism for challenging financial support of religion by the executive branch. The effect would be to grant the president and his staff, as well as the vast federal bureaucracy, a license to preach.

An article in the February 6 Watcher discussed this case. And read this related AP story here.

Americans United for Separation of Church and State (AU) recently filed an updated complaint in their lawsuit against the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) challenging use of public funds for the Northwest Marriage Institute's bible based marriage counseling program. The Institute received a direct grant of $50,000 from the Department of Health and Human Service's Compassion Capital Fund, to help small religious groups increase their ability to compete for government contracts. A second $50,000 subgrant came from the nonprofit Institute for Youth Development and a third grant of $246,000 went to the group through the HHS Healthy Marriage Initiative.

The lawsuit contends that the marriage education program is essentially religious, providing examples from previous newsletters written by the founder, Dr. Bob Whiddon.

The complaint , states, "Both its premarital and marriage-counseling seminars include session on 'God's Plan for a Healthy Marriage.' Participants in those sessions learn that God designed marriage, and they receive instruction on God's plan for how marriage should work. Attendees at the Marriage Institute's programs will 'discover tools, embedded in God's Word, that can be used in real life to resolve real life problems."

Attorneys for AU argue that the nonprofit used the grant money to create these materials and others like it, and to pay some of the salaries of the employees who engaged in Bible based counseling. Further details of how the program operates will emerge as the case moves toward trial.

The Institute case also challenges federal capacity building grants meant to help small religious groups compete for more federal funding. AU contends such funds will be used for purchasing computers or developing a website, and both will ultimately be used to support the group's religious work. But Whiddon told the New York Times "The grants say that I'm allowed to do things that will allow me to increase the capacity of my organization to serve the community …None of what we do with the money is for religious purposes."