The Court ruled that the state of Washington had the right to decline to fund education for religious vocations with tax dollars. As I argued a few months ago, Davey's attorney, Jay Sekulow, was essentially arguing in favor of judicial activism. He wanted unelected judges to, by raw judicial fiat, overturn the democratically-enacted constitution of the state of Washington.
Chief Justice William Rehnquist, writing for the majority, said of the law:
It does not deny to ministers the right to participate in the political affairs of the community. And it does not require students to choose between their religious beliefs and receiving a government benefit. The state has merely chosen not to fund a distinct category of instruction.As we conservatives are always saying, the Constitution limits the Congress from passing laws regarding the establishment or the free excercise of religion. It says nothing that mandates (or precludes, on a state level) tax dollars being spent on religious instruction.