Berkley Center

Flast v. Cohen is a significant case because it was the first to recognize that federal taxpayers have the ability to challenge federal statutes on Establishment Clause grounds. Prior to Flast, individuals were not permitted to challenge federal statutes solely on the grounds that the laws harmed their interest as taxpayers. Flast involved a federal program that provided funds to religious schools for the purchase of textbooks and instructional materials. A group of taxpayers filed suit alleging that the program violated the Establishment Clause by promoting religion. The government responded that the Court should dismiss the case based on the rule that taxpayers do not have the ability to challenge federal laws. However, the Court recognized a narrow situation in which a taxpayer can challenge the constitutionality of a statute. First, a taxpayer may only challenge the exercise of congressional power under the taxing and spending clause of Art. I, § 8 of the Constitution. Second, the taxpayer must show that the challenged law exceeds specific constitutional limitations imposed upon the exercise of congressional taxing and spending power. The Court found that the Establishment Clause is such a limit on Congress’s power to tax and spend. Thus, the Court held that the taxpayers were able to challenge the constitutionality of the funding program.