A recent circuit court ruling deemed a $5 million grant from the West Virginia Water Development Authority to the College of St. Joseph the Worker unconstitutional. However, a closer analysis of the grant’s structure, intent, and outcomes demonstrates that the award is both secular in purpose and permissible under the state constitution. The decision, if allowed to stand, risks hindering public-private partnerships that advance economic revitalization, trade skills, and infrastructure development in struggling areas of West Virginia.
The American Humanist Association, represented in this case by the American Civil Liberties Union, has taken a firm stance advocating for a strict application of separation of church and state. Their legal challenge targets public funding awarded to religiously affiliated institutions. Notably, the presiding judge in the case, Hon. Richard Lindsay, is a former Democratic state senator who was defeated in the 2022 election by then-Senator Mark Hunt, a Republican. Judge Lindsay’s political background and recent electoral defeat provides relevant context in understanding his judicial perspective.
The West Virginia Constitution’s establishment clause protects against the use of public funds for overt religious purposes. However, the state has long recognized that neutral aid to faith-affiliated institutions—when used for nonsectarian goals—can be legally permissible and beneficial to the public good.
The grant awarded to the College of St. Joseph the Worker met this test:
-
The core $2.1 million investment was allocated to create a real estate, development, and construction company in Weirton, WV. This entity would serve as a vocational pipeline for young West Virginians, addressing urgent labor shortages in carpentry, plumbing, and HVAC work—not religious education.
-
The scholarship funding ($1.6 million) was intended to recruit and train West Virginia students in skilled trades. These scholarships were not tied to religious instruction or beliefs, and admission to the program does not require adherence to the Catholic faith.
-
The think tank component ($1 million)—while the most controversial—can be severed from the grant or restructured to focus exclusively on secular civic engagement and workforce policy. Its presence should not nullify the grant in its entirety, especially when the majority of the funds are directed toward infrastructure and vocational training.
Legal Precedent and Neutrality Principle
Under both federal and state interpretations of church-state separation, government funding is not inherently unconstitutional simply because it flows to a religiously affiliated institution, as long as:
-
The primary purpose of the funding is secular.
-
The aid is available on a neutral basis, not restricted to religious groups.
-
The government does not control religious doctrine.
This mirrors the logic of the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Trinity Lutheran Church v. Comer (2017), where a church-run preschool was lawfully awarded a state grant for playground resurfacing, a nonreligious public safety goal.
Similarly, the College of St. Joseph the Worker proposes to use the funds for infrastructure, labor development, and economic investment—all core functions of the Water Development Authority.
Policy Implications
If upheld, the ruling creates a chilling effect on cooperation with faith-affiliated non-profits, even when they offer critical services in rural and underserved communities. Many hospitals, addiction recovery centers, and trade programs in Appalachia have religious origins but serve the general public. Disqualifying such institutions simply on the basis of affiliation would be discriminatory, wasteful, and counterproductive.
The state should appeal the ruling and clarify that the purpose of the grant was economic and workforce-related. Public funding should remain neutral, not hostile, toward religiously affiliated entities that offer broad public benefit.
The College of St. Joseph the Worker grant represents a strategic investment in skilled labor and infrastructure growth. The state’s constitutional establishment clause should not be misused to exclude faith-based partners from participating in public development, especially when their programs are rooted in neutral, measurable, and secular public outcomes. Regardless of the American Humanist Association’s position, individuals should never be excluded from society simply because they are motivated by their religious faith and the good works that flow from it.
