Education News

Supreme Court opens door to nationwide school voucher expansion

By Tim Walker

Today the United States Supreme Court allied itself with the far-right school privatization agenda by sanctioning the use of public funds for private school tuition. In a 5-4 decision, the Court ruled in Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue that a provision in the Montana Constitution designed to prevent public money from flowing to private religious schools could not be used to strike down a private school voucher program.

Montana is one of 37 states with what are known as “No Aid” constitutional provisions. Montana’s dates back to 1889, but was amended and reaffirmed in 1972 to ensure “unequivocal support” for the state’s public education system

In 2018, the Montana Supreme Court ruled that a school voucher program passed by the legislature in 2015 violated this clause because it was intended to send money to private religious schools. The Court struck down the entire program. Arguing that the decision violated participating families’ free exercise of religion, the pro-voucher group handling the case appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which agreed to hear the case.

The National Education Association, along with its affiliate the Montana Federation of Public Employees and others, filed an amicus brief supporting the state’s position, arguing that the plaintiffs lacked standing to bring the suit and that the framers of the Free Exercise Clause never intended for it to be used to prohibit states from deciding not to fund religious education. “The court should not transform the federal free exercise clause into a mandate for state funding of religious schools,” NEA General Counsel Alice O’Brien wrote on SCOTUSblog last September.

By ruling for the plaintiffs, however, the Court today appeared to do just that, in the process clearing a legal path for the expansion of school voucher programs across the country.

“At a time when public schools nationwide already are grappling with protecting and providing for students despite a pandemic and mounting budget shortfalls, the court has made things even worse opening the door for further attacks on state decisions not to fund religious schools,” said NEA President Lily Eskelsen García. “The detrimental impact this decision will have on students throughout this country is shameful and unacceptable.”

Complicit in an Extreme Agenda

School voucher schemes already drain hundreds of millions of dollars away from public school students to pay the private school tuition of a select few, while producing abysmal results for students. In study after study—in  Louisiana, Indiana, Ohio, Washington, D.C., and beyond—researchers have found that voucher students perform significantly worse than their peers in public schools in both reading and math. Voters have also been consistently opposed to these programs, and they have been voted down every time they have appeared on the ballot.

But powerful privatization advocates continue to drive the adoption and expansion of vouchers.

With its decision in ‘Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue,’ the U.S. Supreme Court has narrowed the bases on which states may refuse Betsy DeVos’s calls to fund private religious schools.

Betsy DeVos, backed by the deep pockets of her family foundation and other partners in the right-wing network that pushes school privatization, has championed school vouchers for decades, starting with her home state of Michigan. It wasn’t until she became U.S. Education Secretary in 2017, however, that she had the levers of the federal government at her disposable to expand vouchers on a national scale. But even with GOP majorities in the House and Senate and the strong backing of President Trump, Congress in 2017 and 2018 rejected DeVos’ efforts to create a federal voucher program.

In 2019, DeVos tried again with “Education Freedom Scholarships,” a school voucher program dressed up as tax credits. Under the plan, individuals and companies would earn tax credits by donating money to nonprofit scholarship funds. Students then can use the funds to attend private schools, including religious schools. Tax credit programs are school vouchers via money laundering: they still transfer taxpayer money to private schools, but in a less direct way.

DeVos’s federal proposal went nowhere in Congress, but a number of states, including Montana, already had their own tax credit voucher programs in place.

The tax credit voucher program passed by the Montana legislature in 2015 ran afoul of the state constitution, which prohibits state entities from making “any direct or indirect appropriation or payment from any public fund or monies … for any sectarian purpose or to aid any church, school, academy, seminary, college, university, or other literary or scientific institution, controlled in whole or in part by any church, sect, or denomination.”

Funded by a network of backers including the Koch Brothers and the DeVos Family Foundation, the Institute for Justice (IJ) has long have targeted No Aid provisions, which exist in 38 states. When the Montana Department of Revenue issued a rule stating that religious schools could not participate in the state’s new tax credit voucher program because it would violate the Montana No-Aid Clause, the IJ bankrolled a new case, Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue. When it lost the case before the Montana Supreme Court—which provides the final word on the meaning of the state constitution—IJ appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, asking it to sweep away state constitutional provisions that stand in the way of its agenda to promote school vouchers.

Today the Court did just that. And in its radical decision reversing the Montana court’s ruling on Monday, the Court has opened the door to more private school voucher programs nationwide.

In the process, five justices have become complicit in Betsy DeVos’ extreme agenda to expand vouchers and undermine public education, said Eskelsen García. “DeVos’s myopic mission has nothing to do helping with students, but it has everything to do with privatizing public goods and services for private profit.”

Looking Ahead to November

The Court’s ruling in Espinoza will further embolden privatization advocates, who have are already seizing on the COVID-19 pandemic to promote vouchers and privatization at a time when states and public schools are already facing unprecedented funding shortfalls. In May, DeVos created a $180 million voucher program for private and religious schools, using federal CARES Act funds. Se is also trying to redirect hundreds of millions in CARES funds intended for low-income students to private school students regardless of income.

In a recent radio interview, DeVos was asked if her agenda was about “utilizing this particular crisis” to boost private schools. Her response:  “Absolutely.”

As the 2020 election draws closer, Eskelsen Garcia said, DeVos’s determination to undermine public education will be checked by educators’ enthusiasm for putting an end to her destructive tenure at the Department of Education.

“Rest assured, educators will put that same level of energy into firing DeVos and electing a new president in November because it’s the best thing we can do for our students and for the future of this country.”

10 responses to “Supreme Court opens door to nationwide school voucher expansion

  1. Public schools made this country great. Public education dollars should be used exclusively for our good public schools.

  2. This is the way to stop the brainwashing and dumbing down of the children. The schools all need to be privatized and regulated at the grassroots level like the state or counties. Start by giving school vouchers. The teacher’s union doesn’t want to loose control over our kids. So they will fight it tooth and nail. This is a Pro-Choice issue. Since tax payers pay for schools, they should be able to choose the one they want thus the bad schools go under while the good schools get bigger and better. Right now with public education, especially in minority neighborhoods are krap. The NEA should be ashamed.

  3. It’s a great plan! I love it, I love Trump and our amazing country. At the end of the day, it’s OUR money – many forget this.

  4. This is a terrible blow to already-struggling public schools. As a public school teacher for 33 years, I am appalled that this could happen in our country! Although I attended private religious schools all the way up, I see that as my parents’ choice. They still paid their taxes, they chose to budget for tuition, and they didn’t expect anyone to give them a handout towards the expense. Betsy DeVos has to go!!

  5. I definitely think this is a bad decision. As a taxpayer I don’t want my taxes being spent on private schools, especially when our public schools are having so many problems keeping our public schools properly funded. Many public schools need buildings upgraded, more teachers, and more educational tools. This decision will take away monies from the public school systems, making the upgrades needed even harder to achieve. This will also create an educational system which will favor the rich; making a bigger gap between the rich and poor.

    1. As a taxpayer I do not want a union to decide when schools can open and not. The teachers over played their hand this time in many states through threatening lawsuits if schools reopened forcing school boards to online learning. As a medical provider in the emergency room and Urgent Care I believe you would be appalled to show up to closed doors with a bleeding child or a sick family member, because I was too afraid to show up to work. If teacher unions have the right to make decisions then those paying the bills should too. I want to vote with my feet and take my money with me. I have now moved both my kids to private schools. Good luck to the unions and fighting a new uphill battle.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *