WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a significant case regarding a cultural clash: whether a religious charter school, funded by public money, can be established in Oklahoma.
The high court will evaluate a ruling from the Oklahoma Supreme Court that annulled the decision of a state board, which had authorized the Catholic Church in Oklahoma to launch a charter school.
In recent years, the Supreme Court, leaning conservative, has shown an inclination to allow public funds to be allocated to religious groups. At the same time, several states led by conservative leadership have pushed to incorporate religious elements into public education, such as Louisiana’s mandate for the Ten Commandments to be displayed in classrooms.
The arguments for this case are expected to take place in late April, with a final decision anticipated by early summer. Justice Amy Coney Barrett will not participate in this case, although the reasons for her absence remain undisclosed.
Last June, Oklahoma’s highest court ruled 7-1 that a taxpayer-funded religious charter school would breach the First Amendment’s establishment clause, which prohibits government actions that unduly favor one religion over another.
This ruling stemmed from a narrow 3-2 decision made by the Statewide Virtual Charter School Board in 2023, which had approved the archdiocese’s proposal for the St. Isidore of Seville Virtual Charter School. The online K-12 institution intended to launch for its initial 200 students last fall, aiming to provide an education with a focus on Catholic teachings.
A coalition comprising Oklahoma parents, religious leaders, and a public education nonprofit filed a lawsuit aiming to halt the establishment of the school.
Justice James Winchester, appointed by former Republican Governor Frank Keating, stated in the court’s majority opinion that “Under Oklahoma law, a charter school is a public school. Therefore, a charter school must be nonsectarian.” He further noted that the St. Isidore charter school would promote a Catholic curriculum while operating under state sponsorship.
Opposing this view, Justice Dana Kuehn argued in her dissent that barring St. Isidore from establishing a charter school solely based on its religious identity would infringe on another aspect of the First Amendment that guarantees religious freedom.
The Supreme Court’s decision to address this case was positively received by Alliance Defending Freedom, a legal organization advocating for religious rights, which represents the state board. Jim Campbell, the group’s chief legal officer, remarked that it is ironic for state officials who advocate for religious liberty to discriminate against St. Isidore due to its Catholic doctrine.
Meanwhile, detractors of the Oklahoma charter school are urging the justices to maintain the ruling made by the state court. They asserted, “The law is clear: Charter schools are public schools and must be secular and open to all students,” according to statements made by the American Civil Liberties Union and other legal entities, which are assisting the school’s opponents in a different legal battle.
This legal scenario has placed Oklahoma’s Republican governor, Kevin Stitt, and the state’s Republican attorney general, Gentner Drummond, in a position of contention. Governor Stitt supports the establishment of the charter school, while Attorney General Drummond has retracted previous guidance from his Republican predecessor, advising that the Catholic charter school would be unconstitutional in his opinion.
