The story: A federal judge’s ruling means that Maine can continue to bar religious schools from a state school choice program, despite a 2022 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that struck down an outright ban.
Setting the stage: As the U.S. Supreme Court weighed the landmark Carson v. Makin, Maine extended its anti-discrimination law to private schools participating in its town tuition program.
The other Makin case: A Catholic school and a rural family sued, arguing the law forces religious schools to set aside their beliefs if they want to access public tuition subsidies. That, they contend, conflicts with the 2022 Carson ruling, which cleared the way for public funding of religious private schools.
U.S. District Judge U.S. John Woodcock Jr. denied the plaintiffs’ request for a preliminary injunction, saying the case was unlikely to succeed. However, his ruling said he expects a higher court to have the final say.
“The plaintiffs are free to practice their religion, including the teaching of their religion as they see fit, but cannot require the state to subsidize their religious teachings if they conflict with state anti-discrimination law,” Woodcock wrote in a 75-page ruling.
Why it matters: The case, St. Dominic v. Makin, along with a similar lawsuit filed by other Maine families, raises a key question that echoes other education choice cases: Can states require religious schools to adopt policies that conflict with their beliefs to accept public money?
Yes, but: A 2020 U.S. Supreme Court ruling said teachers at religious schools are not covered by federal employment discrimination laws if their roles are “ministerial.” Whether that line of reasoning could play a role in Maine and Oklahoma has yet to be determined.
Catch up quick: Maine is one of a handful of northeastern states that allows students in areas without public high schools to receive “town tuition” funds to attend nearby private schools. Maine banned religious schools from participating in 1982 after including them for nearly a century. Three families sued the state in 2018 on the grounds of religious discrimination, resulting in the 6-3 Carson decision.
Adèle Keim, senior counsel at Becket Law, representing St. Dominic Academy and a Catholic family, accused the state of making an end run around Carson. She also said the state allows out-of-state schools to participate and admits it does not police their policies. “St. Dominic is just asking for the same treatment Maine already gives to other private schools."
The state’s response: The state attorney general did not comment on the federal judge’s ruling. However, in a statement shortly after the Carson ruling, he said he was “terribly disappointed and disheartened” by the decision and called the education offered by certain religious schools “inimical to public education.”
To be continued: The plaintiffs have already appealed to the First Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston.
Having a judge determine how much money to spend on Florida schools and where to spend it is “an exercise in futility, and madness, and a waste of funds,” Florida Board of Education member Roberto Martinez said today.
Martinez’s comments came after a Department of Education attorney updated the board on a high-profile lawsuit that charges the board and lawmakers with violating state constitutional provisions for high quality schools. It was filed in 2009 by eight plaintiffs, including the Orlando-based parents group Fund Education Now. Last month, the Florida Supreme Court refused to block it from going to trial.
Martinez, a former U.S. attorney for the Southern District of Florida, is among the defendants. Here is what he had to say:
So basically they’re asking a sitting trial court judge in a county – in this case, Leon County – to tell 67 superintendents and the Board of Education, for example, how much funding to put into a particular program in a district, correct? Among other things? (The attorney says yes.)
I’ve probably been one of the most outspoken members on the board for more funding for education, funding for effective programs and I believe we need more of it. But to have a court judge, no matter how capable – and this is a capable jurist – be given the responsibility to determine how much money is adequate, in order to fund a particular service or program in a particular district in the state of Florida, is an exercise in madness. It is a ridiculous relief to request because at the end of the day, it cannot be implemented. It cannot. And in fact, a judge does not have the authority to tell the Legislature how much money to appropriate. They don’t make the funding decisions. (more…)
