Remonstrance - a forcefully reproachful protest.

I am confused. Does this law not also offer reimbursement opportunities for those attending private institutions other than catholic schools...such as schools for profit or schools of other religions?

I struggle with why he thinks this question must be asked, when it doesn't have to be asked in the other scenarios he brings up. Why does it matter what the school is if the check is to blanketly support children's transportation to education? (just food for thought)

Neutrality in this situation is incredibly hard to define.

I find the tension between not using laws to aid the practice of religion and making sure laws don't prevent or discourage this practice to be very interesting. It is like walking on a tight rope, where on either side there is a disregard to the 1st amendment in one way or the other.

I think it is interesting to think about how this "indignation" is connected to the feelings of indignation around the taxation without representation which led directly to the revolutionary war. When considering the historical context of the constitution it is important to keep in mind not just the thoughts and concerns of the framers, but also the ways that the historical context was effecting public opinion.

I think that the choice to reference and then proceed to examine the constitution through the eyes of the framers in the time it was written, here is very interesting. This reminds me of discussions we have had about the different ways justices can interpret the constitution and specifically the originalism interpretation, which has been common throughout judicial history.