On April 30, the Supreme Court of the United States will hear two cases that could force states to use public funding for religious schools, which would drain resources for traditional public schools and further degrade the once-sacred wall separating church and state.
In Oklahoma Charter School Board v. Drummond and St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School v. Drummond, the Court will decide whether the Oklahoma Supreme Court correctly found that a charter authorizing board’s decision to create the nation’s first religious public charter school violated the Oklahoma state constitution, the state charter school statute, and the U.S. Constitution.
The National Education Association, which joined a broad coalition in filing an amicus brief with the Court, says these cases constitute a direct attack on public education that could further destabilize funding for public schools across the nation.
“Every student—no matter where they live, what they look like, or their religion—deserves access to a fully-funded neighborhood public school that gives them a sense of belonging and prepares them with the lessons and life skills they need,” said NEA President Becky Pringle in a statement.
“Allowing taxpayer dollars to fund religious charter schools would put both public education and religious freedom at risk, opening the door to more privatization that undermines our public education system,” said Pringle.
The stakes for public education are high: This decision will not merely determine whether Oklahoma may choose to use taxpayer dollars to fund religious charter schools. Rather, it will determine whether the state will be required to approve the first taxpayer funded religious school in modern U.S. history.
Another threat to public school funding
The Oklahoma cases in question arise from a 2023 decision by the Oklahoma Statewide Virtual Charter School Board to approve a religious public charter school—St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School. The board was under pressure from charter school proponents emboldened by the Court’s 2022 decision in Carson v. Makin, which ruled that Maine’s exclusion of religious schools from a state tuition program was unconstitutional.
Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond challenged the Board’s decision on the grounds that it was a violation of the state’s charter school law as well as the state and U.S. constitutions.
According to the Oklahoma Charter School Act, as public schools, charters must “be nonsectarian in their programs, admissions policies, and other operations.” Furthermore, the Oklahoma Constitution prohibits aid to religious organizations and requires public schools to be “free from sectarian control.”
If the U.S. Supreme Court decides that Oklahoma must fund religious charter schools, the state’s public school system will lose more critical funding. Oklahoma is currently ranked 47th on public school funding and has long-ranked near the bottom of the list in per pupil spending, according to NEA Rankings & Estimates data.
“Requiring Oklahoma to fund religious doctrine in charter school programs diminishes funding for classroom resources, educator salaries, and other supports our students need,” says 5th-grade teacher Carrie Elledge, who is currently serving as Oklahoma Education Association president.
“Ultimately, it can harm our students and our public schools by funneling funding meant for all to only a select few,” Elledge says.
‘The Oklahoma Supreme Court Got It Right’
In the past eight years, the U.S. Supreme Court has begun to chip away at what was considered a religious protection from government interference in order to require that government fund religious exercise. Notably, in Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue the Court ruled that Montana could not refuse to allow religious schools to participate in its school voucher program despite its state constitutional prohibition against state aid to religious schools.
Still, the Court would have to take that logic a giant step further to require Oklahoma to fund religious charter schools, explains NEA General Counsel Alice O’Brien.
“To reach that result, the U.S. Supreme Court would have to conclude that charter schools are private, not public, entities,” says O’Brien.
This would be shocking given that the Archdiocese of Oklahoma City and the Diocese of Tulsa wrote in their petition that they intended to establish a charter school that would operate as a Catholic school in every respect and participate “in the evangelizing mission of the church.”
“The Oklahoma Supreme Court got it right when it ruled that Oklahoma charter schools are public schools because they were formed as part of the state’s public school system and they are mostly regulated by and entwined with the public school system,” says O’Brien.
According to the state’s Charter School Act, as public schools, charters must “be nonsectarian in their programs, admissions policies, and other operations.”
Funding the Schools Our Students Deserve
The ramifications of requiring taxpayer money to fund religious charter schools will extend far beyond Oklahoma’s borders. Should the court decide that states must fund religious charter schools, the effects on public schools will be seismic.
Here’s the bottom line: Charter school funding formulas are far more generous than the amounts made available under school voucher programs. A court ruling opening up charters to religious operators would surely inspire many religious schools to move away from voucher program participants and become charter school operators, imposing a massive drain on state education funding systems.
Nearly every state in America now has a charter school law—all of which define and treat charter schools as public schools—including states that have resisted private school voucher programs. More than 3.7 million students now attend those schools, which is roughly 7 percent of all students.
The potential drain on public school resources will put states in an impossible position of where to cut to meet mandates and continue as many programs and services as possible.
As the amicus brief states: “Traditional public schools have already felt the financial strain of sharing limited public funds with charter schools and school voucher programs. Religious charter schools would exacerbate this problem.”
The brief goes on to explain that traditional public schools educate the vast majority of students, including those with disabilities, a population that religious charter schools are less likely to serve. Adding to the financial strain on traditional public schools will harm the broad cross-section of students served by traditional public schools.
The Court is expected to issue its decision this summer.