Community Council v. Jordan

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that if the beneficiaries could not obtain aid without attending “chapel services,” it “would render unconstitutional the payments ... to the Salvation Army”
• observing that payments by the State to the Salvation Amy represented “relief expenditures made by the Salvation A-my”
• holding reimbursement to a religious institution, the Salvation Army, for emergency services expenditures permissible under article II, section 12 of Arizona constitution, an identical provision to article I, section 11
• holding reimbursement to a religious institution, the Salvation Army, for emergency services expenditures permissible under article II, section 12 of Arizona constitution, an identical provision to article I, section 11
• stating that the issue before the Court was “whether the state ... can choose to do business with and discharge part of its duties through denominational or sectarian institutions without contravening constitutional prohibitions”
• “ ‘Aid’ in the form of partially matching reimbursement for only the direct, actual costs of materials given entirely to third parties of any or no faith or denomination and not to the church itself is not the type of aid prohibited by our constitution.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).