Written by Charles J. Russo
Almost 100 years ago, a group of nuns took part in a lawsuit against the state of Oregon that made it all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.
What is their cause? Keep Catholic schools open. In 1922, voters approved a proposal that required nearly all children between the ages of 8 and 16 to attend public schools, specifically aimed at closing faith-based schools.
However, the Supreme Court's 1925 decision in Pierce v. Sisters of the Holy Name of Jesus and Mary, ruled in favor of the nuns. The ruling became a kind of Magna Carta for private schools, including faith-based schools, protecting their right to operate both secularly and religiously. Equally important, Pierce has been used to protect parents' rights to make choices about their children's education.
Non-public schools, such as those run by sister associations, no longer have to defend the right to exist. Today, the pendulum has swung in the opposite direction. In recent years, the Supreme Court has increasingly allowed public funds to go to faith-based schools, their students, or both.
On April 2, 2024, the Oklahoma Supreme Court is scheduled to hear oral arguments in a case that could further reshape the rules. Critics argue that the decision to allow Catholic charter schools to open its doors would all but destroy the boundaries between church and state in education. .
AP Photo/Sue Ogrocki
property and childcare
In 1922, voters in Oregon approved a plan requiring parents of children between the ages of 8 and 16 to attend public schools. The law created a number of exceptions, including for children who had already completed eighth grade and those living far away, but did not include private schools.
This law would effectively ban non-public schools. The move comes just as the influence of anti-immigrant groups such as the Know Nothing Party, which opposes waves of mostly Catholic immigrants as un-American, is beginning to wane.
Catholic school officials objected to Oregon's actions, as did officials at the secular Hill Military Academy. After a federal trial court in Oregon ruled that the law could not go into effect, Governor Walter M. Pierce appealed on behalf of the state. The U.S. Supreme Court subsequently ruled unanimously in the school's favor.
The Supreme Court raised two main issues, both of which relied on the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause, which states that no state can “take the life of any person without due process of law.” “No one shall be deprived of freedom, property, or property.”
The justices recognized the state's authority to “regulate all schools, whether private or public, and to examine, supervise, and examine their teachers and students.” But aside from health and safety issues, states typically impose fewer rules on nonpublic institutions. . However, the court agreed that this law would significantly impair the ability of school owners to operate their schools and significantly reduce the value of their assets.
Second, the justices turned to parental rights, recognizing that parental rights are among the freedoms protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. In the oft-quoted phrase, the court declared that the child is “not merely a creature of the state; not merely a creature of the state.” Those who raise him and guide his destiny have the right to recognize him and prepare him for further duties, along with high duties. ”
The judges invalidated the Oregon statute because it was “unreasonable interference.”[d] Parents and guardians have the freedom to direct the upbringing and education of their children under their control. ”
Non-public schools, public funds
The latest battle over religion and education before the Supreme Court is not about the right to exist for faith-based schools, but about how much state funding schools and their students can receive. Starting in 2017, the Supreme Court handed down a trilogy of cases that significantly increased the amount of government aid available.
The first case, Trinity Lutheran Church v. Comer, involved Missouri authorities in which a Christian preschool and day care center used recycled cut tires to resurface playgrounds to improve safety. Occurred after being prevented from purchasing. This is a state program available to other nonprofit organizations.
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the church in 2017. The First Amendment's Free Exercise Clause prohibits the government from prohibiting the “free exercise” of religion. The majority argued that the Free Exercise Clause means the state cannot single out organizations or people by denying them universally available benefits based solely on their religion.
AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein
In 2020, the court again expanded aid limits for students in K-12 religious schools. The case, Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue, arose from a state program that granted tax credits to parents who sent their children to private schools. But the state's constitution prohibits public funding for religious education programs, so parents who send their children to faith-based schools were barred from participating.
Using a rationale similar to that applied in Trinity Lutheran Church, the court held that the no-aid provision discriminated on the basis of religion and violated the Free Exercise Clause of the Constitution.
Most recently, in Carson v. Makin in Maine in 2022, the court further expanded public funding for faith-based schools. The Supreme Court invalidated a statute that excluded “sectarian” schools from a tuition program for parents living in districts without public secondary schools. Because Maine's constitution guarantees free public education, parents in these districts can pay tuition to send their children to the schools of their choice.
The justices also struck down the law, saying it violated the Free Exercise Clause by treating religious people and groups differently. Further, echoing Pierce's statements, the court found that Maine's statute does not protect a parent's right to send their child to the school of their choice.
push the boundaries
Pierce also laid the foundation for the “parental choice movement” in education, including charter schools. Typically, these schools operate under performance contracts, or “charters,” with public sponsors such as local school boards and sometimes universities. While charter schools have more freedom to design their own standards and curriculum, unlike regular public schools, they can be closed if they fail to meet established goals for student achievement.
In June 2023, Oklahoma's Statewide Virtual School Board approved enactment of the nation's first faith-based charter, a move that raises questions about how far the pendulum allowing government aid for religious schools could swing. It shows whether there is. But St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School, which plans to open under the guidance of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Oklahoma City and the Diocese of Tulsa, will not begin classes without a fight.
The Oklahoma Supreme Court has scheduled oral arguments for April 2, 2024, after the Oklahoma attorney general and others filed a lawsuit seeking to block the opening of St. Isidore School. Opponents of the school argue that the existence of a faith-based charter violates not only the U.S. Constitution, but also the Oklahoma Constitution. According to the regulations, public schools are “free from sectarian control” and cannot use public funds for support. Religious sites and various national statues.
Pierce remains a watershed moment for the rights of non-public schools, including religious ones, and parents' rights. Given recent Supreme Court developments, both of these rights appear to be alive and well into Pierce's second century, but they are not without controversy.
Charles J. Russo is the Joseph Panzer Professor of Educational Research and Teaching at the University of Dayton.
This dialogue was born out of deep-rooted concerns about the declining quality of public debate and recognition of the important role that academic experts can play in the public sphere. Information has always been essential to democracy. It is a social good, just like clean water. But many people now find it difficult to trust the media and experts who have spent years researching a topic. Instead, they listen to the loudest voices. These ignorant opinions are amplified by social media networks that reward people who provoke anger instead of insight and thoughtful discussion. This conversation aims to be part of the solution to this problem, giving voice to the real experts and making that knowledge available to everyone. The Conversation is on FlaglerLive every night at 9pm.
