The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to review an Oklahoma case that could determine whether states must permit religious schools to operate as publicly funded charter schools. This decision has the potential to reshape public education nationwide by challenging existing church-state separation rules. The case, St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School vs. Drummond, raises key constitutional questions about religious freedom and public funding in education.
Charter Schools and Religious Affiliation
Charter schools are publicly funded but independently operated institutions that offer an alternative to traditional public schools. However, under current law, they must remain secular and unaffiliated with any religious organization. This case directly challenges that requirement, arguing that preventing religious schools from joining the charter system constitutes discrimination against religion under the First Amendment.
Supreme Court to Rule on Religious Charter Schools and Public FundingThe case has a complex background in Oklahoma. The Catholic Archdiocese of Oklahoma City initially received approval to open St. Isidore as a religious virtual charter school. However, the state’s attorney general and Supreme Court later ruled that Oklahoma’s constitution prohibits public funding for religious institutions. Advocates for the school then escalated the matter to the U.S. Supreme Court, seeking to overturn the decision.
Previous Supreme Court Rulings on Religious Schools
Since 2017, the Supreme Court, under Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., has issued multiple rulings favoring religious institutions’ access to public funding. Decisions in Montana and Maine have allowed parents to use state funds for religious schooling. Religious rights advocates argue that Oklahoma’s exclusion of a Catholic charter school contradicts these precedents and should be overturned.
The Supreme Court is expected to hear arguments in late April. If the justices rule in favor of St. Isidore, the decision could pave the way for religious charter schools across the country, altering the nature of public education. Notably, Justice Amy Coney Barrett did not participate in the decision to take up the case, though she did not provide a reason for her recusal. The ruling could set a significant precedent on the balance between religious freedom and state funding.