Reviews are still coming in questioning the Supreme Court's ruling earlier this week in Arizona Christian School Tuition Organization v. Winn. An LATimes editorial calls the decision a "bad precedent":

The decision might seem technical, but it will make it harder in the future for taxpayers to challenge programs that breach the wall between church and state.
...
State legislatures are forever passing laws, including tax measures, that raise issues of unconstitutional establishment of religion. The court was right in 1968 to allow citizens to challenge such laws. It was wrong in the Arizona case to limit that access.

The Arizona Republic's Kathleen Ingley writes that the decision "punches a hole in the wall between church and state."

Law professor Geoffrey Stone laments the ruling "carved a large hole out of the Establishment Clause", adding:

Although the issue in the case was subtle, the consequences are not.
...
With their decisions in Hein and Arizona Christian School Tuition Organization, the five conservatives on the Supreme Court have thus enabled government to violate the Establishment Clause at will, by denying courts the authority to declare even unconstitutional programs unconstitutional. In so doing, they have, in Justice Kagan's words, eviscerated "our Constitution's guarantee of religious neutrality."

Read about the Baptist Joint Committee's response here .