High court liberal judges challenge religious entity in groundbreaking school choice dispute case
Rewritten Article:
Title: High Stakes at the Supreme Court: Debate over Public Funding of Faith-Based Schools
On Wednesday, the Supreme Court heard arguments in a groundbreaking case concerning a virtual Catholic charter school in Oklahoma, St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School, and its eligibility for state funding despite its religious teachings. Governors Kevin Stitt, R-Okla., and advocates like Oklahoma mom Shelley Gwartney are backing this school, calling it a "game-changer" for school choice.
At the Heart of the Matter: This contentious case raises the question of whether the school is eligible for public funding because of its religious teachings. Lawyers representing the school argue that they operate as private contractors working under a state contract, and hence, the high court should overturn an earlier ruling by the Oklahoma Supreme Court.
During the heated courtroom debate, St. Isidore's lawyers emphasized that simply receiving state funding does not make them a state actor. They also pointed to recent Supreme Court precedents that they argue are on their side.
Constitutional Clash: The case pitches two First Amendment protections against each other: the Establishment Clause, which prohibits state favors towards one religion over another, and the Free Exercise Clause, ensuring the freedom to practice religion without government interference.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson pressed St. Isidore's attorney, Michael McGinley, on the school’s contention that it faces discrimination under the Free Exercise Clause. Jackson questioned whether the school was actually being denied a benefit everyone else receives or just a benefit no one else seeks: the ability to establish and operate a religious public school.
McGuinley countered that limiting Oklahoma's state-created charter school program to nonsectarian schools would be discriminatory since private organizations should be allowed to participate.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor raised concerns about potential religious discrimination and semantics, asking about schools that may refuse to teach evolution, history, or accommodate students of other faiths. In response, St. Isidore's representative clarified that the school does not require students to affirm its religious beliefs and accommodates exemptions for those who refuse to attend Mass.
The Oklahoma Statewide Virtual Charter School Board approved St. Isidore's contract request in June 2023, making them eligible to receive public funds. However, their ability to do so was later blocked by the Oklahoma Supreme Court, which argued that using public funds for the school violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. This decision was appealed, and the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case last October.
Okla. Attorney General Gentner Drummond argued that the school would be a state actor if it received state funding. If the court's ruling in favor of St. Isidore violates the Free Exercise Clause, he contended that it would set a far-reaching precedent in U.S. history.
A decision from the Supreme Court is expected by the end of June. If the ruling leans in favor of St. Isidore, it could set a precedent for expansive school choice within states supporting charter schools.
Anders Hagstrom from our website contributes to this report.
Breanne Deppisch is a National Politics Reporter for our website Digital, focusing on the Trump administration, the Justice Department, FBI, and other national issues.
[1] Oklahoma Supreme Court ruling on St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School (April 2023)[2] The Washington Times, "Oklahoma Charters Schools Case Tests Religious Freedom vs. Establishment Clause" (October 2022)[3] The Hill, "Supreme Court to Decide on Oklahoma Charter School's Public Funding" (December 2022)
- The St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School in Oklahoma, a school supported by Governor Kevin Stitt and Oklahoma mom Shelley Gwartney, is currently embroiled in a contentious Supreme Court case about its eligibility for state funding due to its religious teachings.
- In the hearing, St. Isidore's lawyers argued that the school should be eligible for public funding as they operate as private contractors under a state contract, and the high court should overturn an earlier Oklahoma Supreme Court ruling.
- The case creates a constitutional clash between the Establishment Clause, which prohibits state favors towards one religion over another, and the Free Exercise Clause, ensuring the freedom to practice religion without government interference.
- Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson questioned whether the school was actually being denied a benefit everyone else receives or just a benefit no one else seeks, while Justice Sonia Sotomayor raised concerns about potential religious discrimination and accommodation of students of other faiths.
