Liberty University student Bethany Hall is petitioning the Supreme Court after the state of Virginia revoked her financial aid grant when she switched to a religious degree program.

Hall was originally the recipient of $5,000 in annual aid to study music education at Liberty University, a private Christian institution, in the city of Lynchburg, under the Virginia Tuition Assistance Grant Program – which is open to Virginia residents attending an accredited higher education institution in the state.

When Hall changed her major to youth ministries, then to music and worship, the State Council of Higher Education for Virginia revoked the grant, which Hall says violates her First Amendment free exercise rights.

“The government can’t deny publicly available benefits because a student’s major is too religious,” said John Bursch, senior counsel and vice president of appellate advocacy at Alliance Defending Freedom, a nonprofit conservative Christian legal advocacy group. “That’s religious discrimination. It’s wrong, and it’s unconstitutional.”

The council cited a long-held eligibility requirement that funds be awarded only to students enrolled in “nonprofit private institutions of higher education whose primary purpose is to provide collegiate, graduate, or professional education and not provide religious training or theological education.”

Specifically, the rule excludes vocational/ministerial/pastoral degree programs under Classical Instructional Programs (CIP) code 39, such as Bible/Biblical studies, Women's Ministry, Religious/Sacred Music and other similar areas of study. 

VTAG does, however, include academic religion-major programs under CIP 38 (Philosophy and Religious Studies), which remain eligible.

“It is odious to our Constitution for a state to fund a degree in music but refuse to fund a degree in music & worship,” said Steven Fitschen of the National Legal Foundation, who is representing Hall.

When Hall brought her case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, it was denied due to a 2004 U.S. Supreme Court decision in which a Northwest College student, Joshua Davey, was similarly declared ineligible for a scholarship from the state of Washington when he chose to pursue a degree in pastoral ministries.

The court ruled in Locke v. Davey that the exclusion of religious instruction from state scholarship programs is constitutional and does not violate the First Amendment’s free exercise clause.

“In the absence of any statement from the Supreme Court questioning or rejecting Locke’s holding, it is still the law,” the 4th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals told Hall, who is now petitioning the country's highest court to overturn the ruling with the help of religious freedom advocacy groups such as First Liberty Institute and Alliance Defending Freedom.

“Twenty-two years ago, the Supreme Court’s decision allowed states to single out students like me because our course of study related to our religious calling,” Davey, now an attorney with Troutman Pepper Locke and co-counsel in Hall v. Fleming, said in a statement. 

His firm, along with the National Legal Foundation, First Liberty Institute and Alliance Defending Freedom are supporting Hall in her legal challenge. They filed the Supreme Court petition Aug. 11, asking the justices to reverse Locke v. Davey on the grounds that it is discriminatory and violates Hall's and other students' religious liberty. 

“I am hopeful that the Court will correct that decision and treat students like Bethany equally,” Davey also said. 

But some critics say the state of Virginia is within its rights to rescind the grant. 

In response to a Facebook post announcing the petition, one commenter, under the name Barry Davis, wrote: “Considering the Virginia Tuition Assistance Grant has had the same stipulation for over 50 years (that it can not be applied to a religious studies major), they should rule in favor of the Commonwealth. 

"Thousands of students in Virginia have been in the same situation as her, and no one ever claimed religious discrimination until now.”

Another commenter, Becki Smith, said: “It isn’t about religion. This was a rule before her. She picked something that was already excluded. ... It isn’t just [because] she switched to religion.”

The VTAG has maintained eligibility requirements prohibiting the use of taxpayer dollars to fund religious instruction since the program was established in 1972.

The issue of whether the federal government should be involved in providing aid to religious studies majors also emerged earlier this summer when the Education Department announced new eligibility requirements based on factors such as the earning potential of some majors, in an effort to reduce federal student loan debt. 

When religious programs were found to have low earning potential according to economic assessments, rendering many of them ineligible for federal student aid, right-leaning groups spoke out against perceived religious discrimination.