Religious Colleges Can Require Faith Statements From Students

A Minnesota law violates the First Amendment for banning religious colleges from requiring their applicants to sign a faith statement, a federal court said.

Both public and private programs receive state funds to defray the cost of allowing high school students to receive credits for taking “nonsectarian courses,” Judge Nancy E. Brasel said Aug. 22 for the US District Court for the District of Minnesota.

But the Minnesota Department of Education in 2023 convinced the state legislature to amend the Postsecondary Enrollment Option Act to say that eligible institutions “must not require a faith statement” from high school students applying to the program. A nondiscrimination provision also says that eligible programs can’t discriminate on the basis of “religious beliefs or affiliations.”

Faith-based schools and parents said the change violated their religion rights under the First Amendment and the state constitution.

The state has a compelling interest in establishing equitable access to the programs for all high school students, because public funds are being used, Brasel said. But the ban isn’t narrowly tailored to achieve that interest, she said.

There is an obvious alternative that’s less restrictive on the plaintiffs free exercise rights, Brasel said. The PSEO program could be limited to only public postsecondary schools, she said, noting that alternative was recently upheld by the Fourth Circuit in Kim v. Bd. of Educ. of Howard Cnty.

It’s true that limiting the PSEO program in that way would limit the availability of convenient PSEO opportunities to high school students, Brasel said. But the MDE said that the amendment was passed to equalize access to PSEO programs, not to maximize it, she said.

Because the amendment violates the First Amendment, it also violates the Minnesota Freedom on Conscience Clause of Article One of the state constitution, Brasel said.

The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty and Lathrop GPM LLP represented the plaintiffs. The Minnesota Attorney General’s Office represented the defendants.

The case is Loe v. Jett, 2025 BL 298669, D. Minn., No. 23-CV-1527 (NEB/JFD), 8/22/25.