Oklahoma’s decision to authorize a religious charter school was influenced by another, recent Supreme Court ruling that expanded the potential role and visibility of religion in public spaces. This logic was quickly seized upon by the Archdiocese of Oklahoma City and the Diocese of Tulsa.
The U.S. Supreme Court was unable to make a decision in a lawsuit challenging the legality of the nation’s first taxpayer-funded Christian charter school.
According to National Public Radio the court reached a split 4-4 decision, with Justice Amy Coney Barrett recusing herself from the case.
Although the justices were unable to reach a consensus, the split decision effectively allows the Oklahoma Supreme Court to enforce an earlier ruling that found that the establishment of a religious charter school is in violation of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
The court issued its decision in the form of an unsigned opinion, which did not elaborate on how each of the eight participating justices had ruled.
However, because the court was unable to reach a majority decision, the case will not—at this juncture—set any sort of precedent.
Annie Laurie Gaylor, the co-president of the Freedom From Religion Foundation, told USA Today that the decision still represents a “crucial, if narrow, win for constitutional principles.”
“A publicly-funded religious charter school would have obliterated the wall of separation between state and church,” Gaylor said in a statement. “We’re relieved that, at least for now, the First Amendment still means what it says.”
USA Today notes that, during oral arguments, many of the court’s conservative justices seemed sympathetic to the Catholic Church’s proposed charter school.
But the split decision indicates that at least one of the court’s five conservative justices—most likely Chief Justice John Roberts—felt that the school’s establishment would not withstand closer scrutiny.
Oklahoma’s decision to authorize a religious charter school was influenced by another, recent Supreme Court ruling that expanded the potential role and visibility of religion in public spaces. This logic was quickly seized upon by the Archdiocese of Oklahoma City and the Diocese of Tulsa, which argued they should be permitted to operate a K-12 charter school that would incorporate religious elements into its curriculum.
The church’s move was quickly countered by Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond, who filed a lawsuit against the school’s governing body. In his complaint, Drummond, a Republican, said that the charter school’s contract with the church’s governing body was inherently unlawful and in violation of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
Drummond’s case was eventually escalated to the Oklahoma Supreme Court, which ruled 6-2 against the Church and its proposed St. Isidore of Seville Virtual Charter School.
“Oklahoma’s charter schools bear all the hallmarks of a public school identified by this Court and more,” Drummond told the Supreme Court, urging the justices to let the state-level ruling stand.
Drummond also alleged that, if the Church felt Oklahoma’s definition of what constitutes a charter school is unlawful, then so are similar rules set by another 46 states.
The National Alliance for Public Charter Schools lent its support to Drummond’s claim, stating that a win for St. Isidore would pose “an existential threat not just to the fabric of public charter schools, but to their continued existence.”
“With this legal clarity, we can move forward with renewed focus on expanding access to high-quality public charter schools for every family nationwide,” NAPCS president Starlee Coleman said in a statement.
Sources
Supreme Court blocks creation of religious charter school in Oklahoma
US Supreme Court blocks public funding for religious charter school
What to know about charter schools after the latest Supreme Court ruling
Join the conversation!