Public education faces declining enrollment, fragile parental trust, and significant learning losses. This week, the United States Supreme Court added another factor to the difficult education landscape: a ruling that allows more public funds to flow to religious schools.
While not as high-profile as the gun and abortion cases decided by judges this quarter, Tuesday’s decision in Carson v. Makin could have a significant impact on schooling in the United States over time.
Some believe the very nature of secular public education is at stake, causing both excitement and dismay. The effects of the decision could range from more families unenrolling from local schools, to more taxpayer dollars being spent on religious education, public schooling and a growing list of alternatives continuing to delicately coexist.
Why we wrote this
The Supreme Court’s decision this week regarding public funds for religious schools raises questions about the future of public education and whether more taxpayer dollars could eventually fuel a wide range of options. of schooling.
” This [case] is already a rallying cry for those interested in defending public education and the value of public schools in American life. I also think this is absolutely a huge win for the school choice movement,” said Michael Graziano, director of the Institute for Religion and Education at the University of Northern Iowa. “It continues the tendency of this court to try to transform public institutions into private or religious institutions in particular. »
In a 6-to-3 decision, the court ruled that Maine must include religious schools in its single school curriculum. Maine, the most rural state in the United States, has about 5,000 students who live in cities without public schools for their grade level or contracts with neighboring school districts. The state provides these families with funds to attend public or private schools of their choice. The state had restricted tuition funds to exclude “sectarian” religious schools until the court struck down that law.
“The state pays tuition for some students in private schools – as long as the schools are not religious. This is discrimination against religion,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the court’s majority opinion. The court’s three liberal justices dissented.
The ruling will “hopefully reopen the ability for parents to choose the best school for their children under the tuition scheme,” says Amy Carson, who along with husband David joined the lawsuit when their daughter was unable to use state funding. to attend the private school of their choice, Bangor Christian Schools.
“Next domino to fall”
The decision has some scholars wondering whether the reasoning — based largely on the rights of the First Amendment’s free exercise clause rather than the interests of the Establishment Clause — could extend to allow religious entities to operate public charter schools. Or possibly requiring public funding of religious education.
“The logic in this case, if extended, could be applied to [religious] charter schools, and many of us see that as the next domino to fall,” says Preston Green, professor of instructional leadership, law, and urban education at the University of Connecticut.
“It may not end with the charters. It could even go beyond that,” to fund religious education, says Professor Green.
This is a point that one of the judges also raised. “This Court continues to dismantle the wall of separation between church and state that the Framers fought to build,” Judge Sonia Sotomayor wrote in her dissent to the Carson opinion.
But there’s still an important distinction between programs that allow parents to choose from a variety of options and funds provided directly by the state to religious schools, says Jonathan Butcher, a research fellow at the Heritage Foundation in Washington.
“If the money goes to the families who then decide what to do with it, then it’s not for the state to advance religion. If the money went directly to a school that had a religious mission and used it for religious purposes, then it could be a matter of establishing the religion,” he says.
Addition to case law
Tuesday’s court decision builds on previous Supreme Court cases expanding the rights of religious entities in education. In the 2020 Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue case, for example, the court struck down a law barring funds from a state tax scholarship program from going to religious schools.
In both decisions, the court made it clear that states were not required to subsidize private education, “but once a state decides to do so, it cannot disqualify certain private schools just because they are religious,” as Chief Justice Roberts wrote in Espinoza, and quoted in Tuesday’s opinion.
The Chief Justice outlined alternatives Maine could consider for its tuition program, such as adding public schools and transportation, providing tutoring and distance learning, or managing boarding schools.
Pour to implement any of these ideas, “the state should be prepared to fund it,” says Professor Green, who points out that states have historically underfunded education, especially in communities of color.
The ruling in Carson will encourage state lawmakers to see that “there are no federal roadblocks in the way” of creating ways for parents to choose how and where their children learn, says Butcher of the Heritage Foundation.
He thinks the decision will boost college savings accounts, a relatively new concept currently being offered by eight states, according to EdChoice, a nonprofit that promotes school choice.
“That’s the essence of what I think the Carson decision really speaks to, and that’s the idea that the money goes directly to a parent who can then choose between several things at the same time, [like] educational therapy, online courses, personal tutors,” says Butcher.
In Maine, parents can choose a high school for their children if the school is accredited by a regional body or the Maine Department of Education. After parents choose, the local school district forwards payments to the chosen school. Parents could choose religious schools until 1981, when Maine changed the law due to Establishment Clause concerns.
The National Coalition for Public Education, in a statement in response to Carson v. Makin, argued that the United States “must stop creating new voucher programs for private schools and end existing ones.”
“Public schools, which serve all students, are the cornerstone of our democracy. Our nation cannot afford to waste taxpayer dollars on a private education system, especially one that fails to improve student outcomes,” the statement read in part.
Some uncertainty in Maine
It is unclear whether the religious schools at the heart of the Carson case will eventually accept the public tuition to which they are now entitled.
Bangor Christian Schools and Temple Academy, the two institutions the plaintiffs in the lawsuit wanted their children to attend, admit they “discriminate against gay people, transgender people and non-Christians” in their admissions and hiring practices, according to a brief from the State of Maine.
Last year, Maine lawmakers added language to the state’s human rights law that prevents employers from discriminating on the basis of gender identity. During the Supreme Court’s oral arguments, the question was raised whether religious schools, if they received public funds, would be exempt from Maine law, which already prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation. The court’s opinion did not address this issue.
Ms Carson says she is concerned that after four years of legislating the case and the Supreme Court victory, families who want to use state funds to attend Bangor Christian still won’t be able to do so if the schools choose not to participate.
“I don’t expect any of the schools to change their policies just to be able to accept the funds, but it would be very disappointing to go through all of this and have the families who benefit from it not be able to take it. use,” she says.
States could consider a strategy of requiring private schools to ensure they do not discriminate in order to obtain public funds, says Noelle Ellerson Ng, associate executive director of advocacy and governance at School Superintendents. Association, member of the National Coalition for Public Education.
“If you can’t do the work to serve every child who wants to come to your school, you shouldn’t be getting the public funds that go with it,” says Ms. Ng.
The United States can have both strong traditional public schools and school choice, if states provide sufficient funding, says Professor Green. Even so, he says, having to provide more and more money for alternative choices could strain resources and cause problems with fulfilling the state’s constitutional obligations to provide public education for all.
Butcher says public education and school choice programs will continue to co-exist. Public schools still serve about 50 million children, while about 600,000 children are enrolled in school choice programs, he says.
“Carson v. Makin reinforced that we can create other options for parents and not say either/or,” he adds. “It’s neither private nor public – we can have both. »
/data/photo/2022/07/29/62e376eda8d7d.jpg)