Three constitutional questions were brought before the Court on writ of certiorari. I will briefly summarize the arguments made before the courts of appeal. I then present my analysis of these assertions and offer my humble opinion on how the Court should proceed. The petitioner in the first case filed a lawsuit alleging two violations of the Constitution. First, he claims that his right to freely exercise his religion has been restricted, and second, that his freedom from being subject to a government-established religion is being violated. He claims the University of Kansas' denial of his scholarship application because of his religious preferences is unconstitutional. It also contends that the university violated the establishment provisions of the first principle by accepting funds from a non-secular entity. The defendant also claims a violation of the first principle. The University of Kansas believes that “freedom of religious practice” justifies its scholarship requirements. They add that the Constitution provides limits to the freedom of religious exercise only to “maintain public order”. The defendant's lawyers argue that the institution is not involved in the circumstances: the scholarship is solely administered by the university with funding from a private donor, so the school does not show a preference for any religion, it simply distributes a privately funded grant in accordance with the donors' wishes. I would reverse the circuit court's decision and rule in favor of the student. The state, however, has a duty to “facilitate equal religious freedom”; it cannot give preference to any religious opinion. The Constitution clearly prohibits the creation of a government; "The State cannot favor any particular religion... middle of paper ......hallmarks Original position." Ethics 114. University of Montana, Missoula. September 6, 2011. Conference.Rawls, John. A theory of Justice. Revised. 35. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2003. 191. Print. Rawls, John. A revised theory of justice. 35. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2003. 191. Print. Rawls, John. Justice. Revised. 11. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2003. 54. Print. Rawls, John. A revised theory of justice. 35. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2003. 191. Print. Plato, . Crito. 1. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 1947. 6. Print.Platon, . Euthyphro, Apology, Crito. 1. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 1947. 7. Print. Huff, Thomas “Plato” 114. University of Montana, Missoula, November 11 2011..