The Supreme Court on religious charter schools
Should religious charter schools exist? Viewpoints from multiple sides.
Enjoying Framechange? Forward to a friend to help spread the word!
New to Framechange? Sign up for free to see multiple sides in your inbox.
Learn more about our mission to reduce polarization and how we represent different viewpoints here.
Quick message from Braver Angels
Standup comedy is having a moment. From TikTok clips to Netflix specials to late night talk shows, comedians are making their mark on pop culture. Some comedy taps into our common humanity and brings us together; a good live show will turn a theater of strangers into a family.
But comedy can also be divisive, highlighting our differences. Some jokes are viewed as insightful and revealing while others may seem like cheap shots. Pushing boundaries is a common comedic tactic that can startle us and elicit big laughs. Should comedy have limits? Are there things that are too serious to joke about?
Join Braver Angels Debate Chair Cynthia O'Brien on Tues June 10 at 8pm ET for a national debate on the topic: Comedy and Politics. Register here!
Snippets
Ukraine reportedly launched a drone strike that destroyed over 40 Russian warplanes in one of its largest assaults on Russian territory in the war to date. The attack was the latest among recent escalations of the conflict despite peace talks scheduled in Istanbul this week.
The Supreme Court ruled that the Trump administration can terminate the temporary legal status of more than 500,000 immigrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela granted humanitarian parole during the Biden administration.
A federal appeals court granted the Trump administration’s request to temporarily pause the Court of International Trade’s ruling that would have blocked most of the “Liberation Day” tariffs imposed by Trump earlier this year. The Court of International Trade ruled President Trump overstepped his authority in using emergency powers to impose the tariffs.
Sixteen states filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration over its decision to cut research programs and funding for the National Science Foundation. More than $1.4B in research grants – mostly related to diversity, equity, and inclusion – were terminated this year.
The State Department has ordered US embassies to pause scheduling new interviews for student visa applicants and is considering adding social media vetting to its screening requirements.
What’s happening
Last month, the US Supreme Court voted 4-4 in Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board / St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School vs. Drummond. The deadlock means that a June 2024 Oklahoma Supreme Court ruling that blocked a Catholic virtual school’s bid to become the first religious charter school in the US will stand. Justice Amy Coney Barrett recused herself from the case.
How we got here: The school in question – St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School – was created in 2023 with the intent of functioning as a privately-operated, publicly-funded K-12 charter school providing a tuition-free “Catholic education” to interested Catholic and non-Catholic students. The Oklahoma Charter School Board accepted St. Isidore's application to enter Oklahoma's publicly-funded virtual charter school program, and the school planned to open for the 2024-2025 school year.
But after the board’s approval, Oklahoma’s Attorney General Gentner Drummond challenged St. Isidore’s charter school designation and the case went to the Oklahoma Supreme Court. In June 2024, the court ruled that “Under Oklahoma law, a charter school is a public school. As such, a charter school must be nonsectarian.”
The court further specified that a religious charter school would violate both the Oklahoma Constitution and the US Constitution’s First Amendment Establishment Clause prohibiting Congress from making a law “respecting an establishment of religion.” The court ordered the Charter School Board to revoke its contract with St. Isidore, and the school did not receive state funding nor open for the 2024–2025 school year. St. Isidore and Oklahoma’s Charter School Board both filed appeals with the US Supreme Court.
Implications: Longstanding Supreme Court practice dictates that in cases where justices divide equally on a case, the lower court ruling is affirmed, but no national precedent is established for future cases. Therefore, because the US Supreme Court split 4-4, the affirmed Oklahoma Supreme Court decision only applies in Oklahoma, and the question of religious charter schools’ legality is not yet resolved on a national level.
Debate over the ruling centers around the legal arguments of the case and the practical implications of permitting religious charter schools. This week, we bring you viewpoints from multiple sides. Let us know what you think.
Notable viewpoints
More supportive of the ruling:
Permitting a religious charter school would violate the Constitution and other statutes.
St. Isidore, if approved as a charter school, would technically become a government entity and state actor according to a number of legal criteria (e.g., receiving funding from the state; providing a free public education). As such, St. Isidore’s promotion of Catholic teachings and mandated Catholic instruction as a government entity would violate the First Amendment's Establishment Clause, which prohibits the government from promoting a specific religion. (Summarized from the Oklahoma Supreme Court ruling.)
St. Isidore’s status as a charter school would violate a statute in the Oklahoma Charter Schools Act which requires a charter school to be nonsectarian in every aspect of its program and operations and restricts one from being affiliated with a religious institution. (Summarized from the Oklahoma Supreme Court ruling.)
Charter school status for St. Isidore would violate the “no aid” provision of Oklahoma’s Constitution that prohibits “using public money for the benefit or support of any religious institution.” (Summarized from the Oklahoma Supreme Court ruling.)
While US Supreme Court precedent in Trinity Lutheran vs. Comer (2017), Espinoza vs. Montana Department of Revenue (2020), and Carson vs. Makin (2022) has permitted existing religious institutions to receive state funds in certain circumstances (e.g., allowing school vouchers to be used for religious schools), St. Isidore’s intention to be directly state-funded goes far beyond such precedent.
Allowing religious charter schools would upend the public education system and infringe upon the civil rights of Americans.
Taxpayer-funded public charter schools must be open to all students, but a religious charter school by its nature would discriminate against students in admissions based on their religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, or other protected characteristic.
Taxpayers should not be forced to fund any school that is teaching religious ideologies or other beliefs that they find objectionable or offensive.
Allowing St. Isidore to become a religious charter school would effectively require a determination that charter schools are no longer public schools. This would upend charter school laws in 46+ states that provide families a choice in public education and potentially divert funding or shutter some charter schools for the almost 4M students that attend them.
Families already have the right to choose private religious education, and some states such as Oklahoma offer tax credits to parents who wish to send their children to religious schools. But parents should be able to allocate their tax dollars towards religious institutions as they see fit – not forced to subsidize them en masse through the public funding system.
More opposed to the ruling:
Permitting a religious charter school would not violate the Constitution or other statutes.
St. Isidore’s approval as a charter school would not violate the First Amendment's Establishment Clause because allocating public funds to a privately-run and freely-chosen charter school (whereby funding is tied to enrollment) would not equate to the establishment of religion.
St. Isidore’s status as a charter school would not violate the Oklahoma Constitution’s “no aid” provision because the school is providing services that benefit the state in exchange for funding – the funding is not a gift or donation. Oklahoma frequently contracts with private organizations for services, and prior Oklahoma Supreme Court cases such as Oliver vs. Hofmeister (2016) and Burkhardt vs. City of Enid (1989) dictate that public-private contracts are not invalid when a religious organization may benefit from them. (Summarized from Oklahoma Supreme Court Justice Dana Kuehn, in her dissenting opinion.)
It is not illegal for the state to contract with sectarian educational institutions as long as secular institutions are also available for students. The state would not be favoring or establishing any religious organization by allowing funds to go to St. Isidore. Rather, by funding St. Isidore, Oklahoma would be providing more educational opportunities – in line with the mission of Oklahoma’s Charter Schools Act. (Summarized from Oklahoma Supreme Court Justice Dana Kuehn, in her dissenting opinion.)
St. Isidore is inclusive and abides by all applicable nondiscrimination charter school laws. For example, it does not require students or teachers to be Catholic nor require students to affirm Catholic beliefs (e.g., it allows exceptions for students who do not want to attend mass). (Summarized from representation for Oklahoma Charter School Board / St. Isidore during US Supreme Court oral arguments.)
US Supreme Court precedent in cases such as Trinity Lutheran vs. Comer (2017), Espinoza vs. Montana Department of Revenue (2020), and Carson vs. Makin (2022) has dictated that religious schools can receive public funding to operate. For instance, Makin ruled that students in Maine could use school vouchers for religious schools.
Allowing religious charter schools would benefit the public education system and improve access to diverse learning opportunities.
Religious charter schools help address the need for educational choice, particularly in underserved communities, by giving families more affordable options in deciding what type of education is best for their children’s needs. Having fewer and less diverse educational opportunities harms students and their families.
Charter schools, through laws such as the Oklahoma Charter Schools Act, should already be exempt from many of the rules that regulate traditional public schools. Blocking St. Isidore’s approval to operate as a charter school discriminates on the basis of religion and sends the message that charter schools can implement any ideology as long as it is not a religious one.
Oklahoma’s decision to rescind its contract with St. Isidore based purely on its status as a religious institution violates the religious rights of students under the First Amendment's Free Exercise Clause. (Summarized from representation for Oklahoma Charter School Board / St. Isidore during US Supreme Court oral arguments.)
Be heard
We want to hear from you! Comment below with your perspective on religious charter schools and we may feature it in our socials or future editions. Below are topic ideas to consider.
Do you support the establishment of religious charter schools? Why or why not?
What are some arguments or supporting points you appreciate about a viewpoint you disagree with?
Give us your feedback! Please let us know how we can improve.
Music on the bottom
My favorite guitar solo of all time. Eric and I were lucky enough to see Wilco play this song front row at Newport Folk Festival back in 2017. Check out “Impossible Germany.”
– Dylan
Listen on Spotify, Apple Music, or Amazon Music.