A split decision by the U.S. Supreme Court halted plans for what would have been the nation’s first religious charter school. In a 4-4 deadlock announced Thursday, May 22, due to a recusal, the justices were evenly divided over whether Oklahoma’s St. Isidore of Seville Virtual Charter School could move forward.
The debate has drawn sharp lines. Supporters argue that religious groups should have the same opportunity as others to run charter schools. Opponents, including Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond, say public funding of religious education violates the constitutional separation of church and state.
“I have always maintained that we must faithfully uphold the Constitution, even when it requires us to make difficult decisions. I will continue upholding the law, protecting our Christian values and defending religious liberty — regardless of how difficult the battle may be,” he said following the decision.
Supreme Court’s decision
The opinion reads, in one sentence, “The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court.” However, the document does not include how each justice voted or their reasoning behind the opinion.
The tie leaves a lower court ruling in place that blocks the school from operating, effectively pausing the controversial effort to establish a publicly funded institution with a religious mission. It’s important to note that the decision does not set a national precedent because there was no majority opinion. Still, it underscores ongoing legal and political tensions over the role of religion in public education.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett recused herself from the case, leaving the court without a ninth vote that could have broken the tie. While she did not provide a public reason for stepping aside, reports suggest the decision was linked to a personal connection with a Notre Dame Law School professor who has worked with the Catholic Church in Oklahoma.
What is at the heart of the case?
In 2023, the Oklahoma Charter School Board approved funding and signed a contract with St. Isidore of Seville Virtual Charter School, moving the plan forward to open the religious school. Drummond asked the state’s Supreme Court to block the contract, arguing that it violates state and federal law and is ultimately unconstitutional.
Oklahoma law requires charter schools to be nonreligious in all aspects, including their curriculum, student acceptance and day-to-day operations.
Even so, the Archdiocese of Oklahoma City and the Diocese of Tulsa applied to open St. Isidore of Seville Virtual Charter School as a Catholic school. The organizers didn’t hide their religious identity. They said the goal was to create and run a school as part of the Catholic Church’s mission. Their application described the school as a “genuine instrument of the church” and said it would be involved in “the evangelizing mission of the church.”
A judge agreed with Drummond, ruling the state would be funding religious education and ultimately blocking the contract from moving forward. That decision prevented St. Isidore from opening in fall 2024. The case later made its way to the U.S. Supreme Court.
What were the justices considering?
SCOTUS was faced with a decision on using taxpayer money to fund a religious charter school. Drummond said the school was religious and could not receive public funding. He pointed to state law requiring charter schools to operate as public schools — a model used in at least 45 other states. The goal, he said, is to ensure schools are free, open to all students and subject to oversight on curriculum and testing.
However, St. Isidore argued that the school was private, and both parents and students decided to attend. Court documents show that attorneys argued that the charter school would not be representative of the state or the government itself.
St. Isidore’s main argument centered on the free exercise clause found in the First Amendment. Attorneys argued it was created and governed by private individuals and does not perform a governmental function. While Oklahoma labels charter schools as public, the school’s backers say constitutional rights do not depend on labels and that religious groups should not be denied equal access to public programs.
“Oklahoma parents and children are better off with more educational choices, not fewer,” said Jim Campbell, chief legal counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom and the attorney who argued the case before SCOTUS on behalf of the school. “The U.S. Supreme Court has been clear that when the government creates programs and invites groups to participate, it can’t single out religious groups for exclusion, and we will continue our work to protect this vital freedom for parents and students.”
What’s next?
Since the court didn’t set a legal precedent, it can revisit the case in the future, which Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt, R, alludes to.
“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 statement. “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.”
