When the U.S. Supreme Court opens its new term on Oct. 5, one of the closely watched arguments will be a Colorado case asking whether Catholic preschools can refuse to abide by LGBTQ-inclusive nondiscrimination rules and still receive state universal preschool funding.
The dispute centers on Colorado’s Universal Preschool Program, created in 2022 to offer publicly funded early childhood education to four-year-olds regardless of income, and available to public, private, and religious schools that agree to program rules. Participating preschools must sign an “equal opportunity” agreement promising that eligible children will be allowed to enroll and receive services regardless of race, ethnicity, religious affiliation, sexual orientation, gender identity, housing status, income level, or disability. State officials emphasize that participation is voluntary, but any school that joins must comply with the same nondiscrimination standard.
St. Mary Catholic Parish in Littleton and St. Bernadette Catholic Parish in Lakewood, both in the Archdiocese of Denver, operate parish-based preschools that sought to participate in the program while maintaining admission policies rooted in Catholic teaching. According to their federal complaint, the parishes argued that Colorado’s requirement to enroll children and families regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity would force them to accept families whose home life conflicts with Catholic doctrine on marriage and sexuality, burdening their religious exercise and expressive association rights. The lawsuit names Lisa Roy, executive director of the Colorado Department of Early Childhood, and other state officials in their official capacities, contending that the state has structured the program in a way that excludes certain religious providers because of their beliefs.
A federal district court in Colorado denied the parishes’ request for an injunction, and in September 2025 the Denver-based 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed that decision in St. Mary Catholic Parish v. Roy. The appellate panel held that the nondiscrimination rule is a neutral law of general applicability, applies equally to religious and secular preschools, and does not target religious status or religious use. Applying rational basis review, the court concluded that Colorado’s interest in ensuring equal access to preschool justified conditioning public funds on compliance with the rule, and it dismissed the Archdiocese of Denver from the case for lack of standing. In a press statement responding to the ruling, the Colorado Department of Early Childhood highlighted the court’s description of the program as “a model example of maintaining neutral and generally applicable nondiscrimination laws while nonetheless trying to accommodate the exercise of religious beliefs.”
Advocacy groups supporting Colorado have framed the case as a test of whether states may insist that publicly funded programs remain open to LGBTQ families on equal terms. Family Equality, in a July 2026 explainer for parents, stressed that the universal preschool program was designed so “all children in the state can access early childhood education,” and warned that allowing exemptions could mean LGBTQ parents and their children are turned away from publicly funded classrooms. An amicus brief from the Williams Institute at UCLA School of Law notes that many religious schools already participate in the program while following the nondiscrimination agreement, and argues that granting the parishes an exemption would permit them to exclude LGBTQ children and children with LGBTQ parents from taxpayer-funded services.
Supporters of the parishes, including religious liberty organizations, describe the case as a test of whether the Free Exercise Clause requires states to accommodate faith-based providers that cannot in conscience comply with certain nondiscrimination rules. A litigation summary from the U.S. Constitution-based advocacy group Constitutional Accountability Center explains that the Supreme Court is being asked to decide if Colorado must admit into its universal preschool program religious preschools that decline to follow the ban on discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. Those advocates contend that excluding the parish preschools unless they change their policies amounts to discrimination against religious exercise, because it conditions access to a public benefit on abandoning beliefs about marriage and family.
Civil rights organizations and LGBTQ advocates, including the ACLU of Colorado, counter that allowing publicly funded preschools to deny enrollment to LGBTQ families would undermine equal protection principles and stigmatize children based on their parents’ identities. In its amicus materials on the case, the ACLU of Colorado underscores that the state’s “equal opportunity” requirement is framed broadly to protect all families, and points to the 10th Circuit’s conclusion that the nondiscrimination rule “exists in harmony with the First Amendment and does not violate the Parish Preschools’ First Amendment rights.” National constitutional law commentators have warned that a ruling for the parishes could narrow the ability of states to attach nondiscrimination conditions to public funding across a range of programs serving children and families.
The Supreme Court’s docket entry in No. 25-581 confirms that the justices agreed in spring 2026 to review the 10th Circuit decision, with briefing underway and oral argument expected later in the term. A case preview from SCOTUSblog notes that the Court will be weighing Colorado’s insistence on one set of rules for all participating preschools against the claim that religious providers are constitutionally entitled to exemptions when nondiscrimination mandates conflict with their beliefs. Observers expect a decision by the end of the term, potentially joining earlier Colorado-originated disputes such as Masterpiece Cakeshop and 303 Creative in defining how far governments may go in enforcing LGBTQ-inclusive nondiscrimination policies when religious objections are raised.