The question in this case is whether or not the state funding this religious school is an establishment of religion. The issue grows more complex when the policies of the school are examined in detail. St. Isidore plans to follow traditional conservative Catholic standards in regard to marriage and sexuality. Due to these standards, students could be denied access to the school because they or a family member are LGBTQ+, of a different religion, or do not conform to Catholic beliefs. The school plans to provide a Catholic education and indoctrinate its students with religious beliefs. The school has stated that it will incorporate the Catholic Church’s teaching into all aspects, subjects, and activities of the school.
The school board has used the recent Supreme Court case of Carson v. Makin as a way to defend their opening of a religious charter school. In the Carson case, Maine compensated tuition for students who lacked a local public school, allowing families to use these funds at private institutions, irrespective of their religious affiliation. The Carson case does not apply in this context. In that case, public funds went to families, who could then choose which school to send it to. In the OKPLAC case, public funds are going directly to the Catholic Church. Whether or not families choose to send their children there, the state will be paying the salaries of religious teachers, paying for the infrastructure of the school, and paying for religious teachings. This direct funding is a state sponsorship of religion and is thus a violation of the Establishment Clause.
Furthermore, there is a compelling state interest in promoting diversity. This precedent was established in the case of Christian Legal Society v. Martinez. The court said that the CLS must conform to the school's non-discrimination policy in order to be recognized as an official student organization. The club required members to conform to Christian values and thus would discriminate against students who did not, especially LGBTQ+ students. The court said that this discrimination was not viewpoint-neutral and thus sided with the university. In the OKPLAC case, the court should apply this same precedent in order to promote the compelling state interest in diversity and inclusion of citizens who are LBGTQ+ or of a different religion.
I believe that St. Isidore should not be permitted to become a charter school. They should be free to open a private school and within that sphere, discriminate against whoever goes against their religious values, but if the government is funding it, that would be an establishment of religion. This case also connects to the Bob Jones University v. United States case, in which the government revoked the universities tax exempt status because it did not permit interracial marriage. The government found that there was a compelling state interest to promote racial acceptance and diversity and told the university that they were free to have those practices, but if they did they would not receive public funds. St. Isidore has a constitutional right to open a school that conforms to Catholic beliefs, but they do not have a right for the government to fund it.
In conclusion, the case of OKPLAC, Inc. v. Statewide Virtual Charter School Board brings up many important debates on the role of funding religious education. Unlike in Carson v. Makin, where tax dollars went to families who then chose which school to send it to, religious or not, the tax dollars in this case would go directly to a religious institution, violating the Establishment Clause. The direct sponsorship of a religion that would also practice discriminatory policies calls into question the state's interest in promoting diversity and inclusion, which the court has prioritized historically, such as in the Bob Jones and Christian Legal Society cases. In order to avoid a violation of the First Amendment, Oklahoma can not open a religious charter school.
Hi Devin,
ReplyDeleteGreat post! I agree with you that opening a religious charter school would violate the Establishment Clause. Although charter schools are managed privately, they still receive money through public funds. Financially supporting a sectarian institution, in my opinion, qualifies as endorsement and establishment of religion. Additionally, the teachings of this school go against the interests of the state in promoting acceptance and diversity. Like you mentioned, this is very similar to the Bob Jones University case, which did not forbid these religious beliefs and practices but merely denied government support. St. Isidore is free to open a school that teaches Catholic beliefs, but they cannot expect the government to pay for it.