SCOTUS Takes Up Catholic Preschools Case That Could Reshape LGBTQ+ Family Protections

The Supreme Court announced on April 20 that it will hear St. Mary Catholic Parish v. Roy — a case that asks whether Catholic preschools in Colorado can take part in the state’s tuition-free universal pre-kindergarten program while refusing to enroll the children of same-sex or transgender parents.

It is the latest in a line of cases the court has taken up involving the collision between religious liberty claims and nondiscrimination rules. It is also, for LGBTQ+ families, the most direct test yet of whether states can require public-funded programs to actually serve them.

What’s at stake

Colorado voters approved a universal preschool program in 2020. The program is open to both public and private schools — including religious ones — but it comes with a condition: no school accepting state funding can refuse to admit a child based on race, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, or a handful of other protected characteristics, including those of the child’s parents.

The Archdiocese of Denver, which runs 34 preschools, says it cannot participate under those terms because Catholic doctrine doesn’t recognize same-sex relationships or transgender identity. It argues the nondiscrimination rule violates its First Amendment free exercise rights by forcing a religious institution either to abandon its beliefs or to forfeit public money its secular peers can access.

A federal district court rejected that argument in June 2024. The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the district court’s ruling in October. The Supreme Court has now agreed to take the case, though it declined to reconsider the underlying 1990 precedent — Employment Division v. Smith — which held that neutral laws of general applicability don’t require religious exemptions.

Why this case matters beyond Colorado

Forty-six states now have some form of state-funded pre-K, and many of them allow religious schools to participate. If the Court rules that Colorado cannot condition funding on nondiscrimination, a cascade of implications follows.

For LGBTQ+ families, it would mean that state-subsidized programs — early childhood education, foster and adoption services, healthcare programs, homeless shelters, job training programs — could continue taking public money while turning them away at the door. This is not hypothetical. The Supreme Court already ruled in Fulton v. Philadelphia (2021) that Philadelphia could not require a Catholic foster agency to certify same-sex couples as foster parents, though the ruling was narrow.

A broad ruling in the preschool case could extend that logic across a much larger swath of publicly funded services. That would put LGBTQ+ parents in the position of either moving to jurisdictions with robust nondiscrimination enforcement or navigating a patchwork of providers who are allowed to refuse them with state subsidies in hand.

The legal mechanics

Religious liberty cases at the Supreme Court tend to hinge on two frameworks:

• The Smith framework (1990): Neutral and generally applicable laws do not require religious exemptions, even when they incidentally burden religious practice.
• The Trinity Lutheran / Carson v. Makin line (2017, 2022): When a state makes a generally available benefit, it cannot exclude religious institutions from receiving it solely because they are religious.

The Archdiocese is arguing under the second framework. Colorado is arguing under the first. The question is whether the nondiscrimination requirement is a “neutral, generally applicable” condition on funding — or whether it singles out religious schools because of their beliefs.

The Court declined to revisit Smith in this case, which means the justices are not planning to issue a sweeping new rule. The ruling, when it comes, is likely to focus narrowly on how Colorado structured its program. But even narrow rulings at this court have a way of generating large downstream consequences.

What LGBTQ+ families can do now

The case will likely be argued in the fall of 2026 with a decision by June 2027. In the meantime, a few practical things:

First, Colorado’s universal preschool program is still running under current rules. Same-sex parents can enroll children in participating schools today without discrimination.

Second, if you have a case — if a religious program receiving public funding refuses to enroll your child — Lambda Legal, the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Project, and GLAD Law are all tracking these fact patterns and can advise on next steps.

Third, state-level nondiscrimination laws matter. In states with strong protections (California, New York, Illinois, Washington, Colorado pre-ruling), LGBTQ+ families have recourse through state courts even if federal protections are eroded. In states without those protections, this is the long fight.

The broader context

This case lands at a moment when the Trump administration has spent its first months dismantling federal DEI programs, implementing anti-trans bathroom policies at the State Department, and restricting gender-affirming care access. A Supreme Court ruling that further narrows what states can require of federally or publicly funded programs would add to that pressure.

But the Court agreeing to hear the case is not the same as the Court ruling for the Archdiocese. The 10th Circuit upheld Colorado’s rules unanimously. The Court could affirm that result, adopt it narrowly, or — as is more likely given its recent record on religious liberty cases — rule for the Archdiocese on tailored grounds that still allow states to write more careful nondiscrimination rules in the future.

Whichever direction it goes, the ruling will set the rules for how far public money can be channeled to programs that refuse to serve LGBTQ+ families. Worth paying attention to.