A plan to create a first-of-its-kind religious charter school in Oklahoma won’t move forward after the Supreme Court came to a 4-4 tie in one of the most closely watched cases of the current term.
The justices released an unsigned opinion on Thursday noting that the court was “equally divided.”
Only eight justices took part in oral arguments and the ruling since Justice Amy Coney Barrett had recused herself.
In the case of a tie in front of the Supreme Court, the lower court ruling remains in place.
Last June, the Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled against the proposed charter school, called St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School, and the charter school board that approved it, determining that allowing a school that openly promotes religion to be publicly funded would violate both the Constitution and state law.
First Amendment tension
The religious charter school lawsuit tested the limits of — and relationship between — the First Amendment’s religion clauses, which prohibit government interference with religious exercise and establishment of a state religion.
Opponents of St. Isidore said using public funding to create and run the school would violate the establishment clause, while its supporters said bans on religious charter schools violate free exercise rights.
Until recently, the school’s opponents generally would have been understood to have an upper hand in the battle, since, throughout the 20th century, the Supreme Court raised concerns about public money going to religious institutions and religious instruction being offered in public schools.
But in a series of cases from the past decade, the Supreme Court shifted its focus away from avoiding church-state entanglement and onto avoiding religious discrimination. The decisions said faith groups can’t be excluded from government funding programs simply for being religious.
St. Isidore’s supporters picked up that refrain in the religious charter school case, arguing that Oklahoma can’t ban religious schools from taking part in its charter school program.
The Catholic school had the support of the Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board and top state officials, but not Oklahoma’s Republican attorney general, Gentner Drummond, who filed a lawsuit to block St. Isidore from being formed.
Drummond said St. Isidore would essentially be a public school in the eyes of the law and, therefore, could not be allowed to promote Catholic teachings throughout the school day, as it planned to do.
Drummond won in front of the Oklahoma Supreme Court, but then the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case.
Religious charter school arguments
During oral arguments on April 30, the Supreme Court appeared closely divided over whether to clear the way for the formation of a religious charter school.
They wrestled with whether or not St. Isidore should be seen as a public school and if the recent rulings on state funding for religious organizations should apply to the charter school context, as the Deseret News previously reported.
Chief Justice John Roberts appeared to be the most likely candidate to join the court’s three liberals during oral arguments, while Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Samuel Alito made it pretty clear that they supported the school.
Since Thursday’s opinion is unsigned, the justices’ ultimate votes in the case are unknown.
Moving forward
Thursday’s ruling is not expected to resolve broader religious freedom battles over funding and education.
Since the court’s decision is specific to the Oklahoma lawsuit, stakeholders in other states could come to the Supreme Court in the future with their own plans to establish religious charter schools.
Those hypothetical future cases would likely be easier for the schools’ supporters to win, since Barrett, who is part of the court’s conservative majority, would be unlikely to recuse herself.
Although she did not explain her recusal from this term’s case, it’s broadly assumed that she felt too close to the situation in Oklahoma since it was tied to the University of Notre Dame, where she used to work.
Reactions to the Supreme Court ruling
Faith groups, religious freedom organizations and legal experts released statements Thursday on the Supreme Court’s ruling in the religious charter school case.
Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt
- “This 4-4 tie is a non-decision. Now we’re in overtime. There will be another case just like this one and Justice Barrett will break the tie,” Stitt said in a news release. “This is far from a settled issue. We are going to keep fighting for parents’ rights to instill their values in their children and against religious discrimination.”
Cecilia Wang, national legal director of the ACLU
- “Requiring states to allow religious public schools would dismantle religious freedom and public education as we know it,” Wang said in a statement. “Today, a core American constitutional value remains in place: Public schools must remain secular and welcome all students, regardless of faith.”
Ryan Walters, Oklahoma superintendent of public instruction
- “Allowing the exclusion of religious schools from our charter school program in the name of 19th century religious bigotry is wrong,” Walters said in a statement. “As state superintendent, I will always stand with parents and families in opposition to religious discrimination and fight until all children in Oklahoma are free to choose the school that serves them best, religious or otherwise.”
Guthrie Graves-Fitzsimmons, vice president of programs and strategy at Interfaith Alliance
- “Religious charter schools are a clear violation of our nation’s commitment to religious freedom for all, which is guaranteed by the separation of church and state,” he said in a statement. “Today’s victory at the U.S. Supreme Court is a victory for every student, every parent, and every American taxpayer’s religious freedom in this country. All Americans are free to practice their faith when we uphold the constitution and avoid government entanglement with religion.”
Fish Stark, executive director of the American Humanist Association
- “Today’s decision is cause for celebration: the constitutional principle of church-state separation and its guarantee of a secular public education remains the law of the land,” Stark said in a statement. “Due to the nature of this decision, we expect our opponents to continue pursuing this radical legal theory. While the opposition recalibrates, we will use this time wisely to organize and mobilize our community to ensure this important victory stands.”
The Supreme Court has not yet announced when it will next release rulings.