Rob Andrews: “I want to make reference to the case of Bowen v. Kendrick which several times has been cited by the majority as proof…”

“I want to make reference to the case of Bowen v. Kendrick which several times has been cited by the majority as proof for the proposition that the court has upheld provisions like these. That is not the case. It is very important to understand the difference between Bowen v. Kendrick and the bill that is before us. In fact, language in Bowen v. Kendrick indicates that there are suspicious constitutional problems with this bill. In Bowen v. Kendrick, the Congress had enacted the Adolescent Family Life Act which was designed to create grant programs for local agencies to counsel young people on issues of sexual relations, personal responsibility and the like. The statute did not expressly exclude religious organizations from receiving these grants. It was silent about the question of what religious organizations could do. There was a lawsuit brought to declare the statute unconstitutional on its face because it failed to exclude religious organizations. The Supreme Court held that the statute was not unconstitutional because it failed to exclude religious organizations.”