The Supreme Court’s Espinoza Decision Will Expand Education Opportunities
A landmark ruling ends anti-religious bigotry in school choice programs.
On Tuesday, the Supreme Court ruled that the Montana state government’s decision to prohibit parents from using scholarships to send their children to private, religious schools was unconstitutional. The landmark decision in Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue has the potential to end 19th Century House Speaker James Blaine’s bigoted influence on modern American education, which has been a roadblock to equal opportunity for millions of American children.
The court case involved a Montana’s program created in 2015 to allow taxpayers to receive a $150 tax credit for donations made to charities that provide private school scholarships to children from low-income families and students with disabilities.
The state legislature created the program to allow these children to enroll in private schools, including those operated by religious organizations. But the state Department of Revenue issued rules that prohibited children from using scholarships to attend religious schools, citing a state constitutional provision that prohibits funds from going to a school run by religious organizations. (Montana is one of 37 states with a so-called Blaine Amendment in its state constitution that prohibits state aid to religious schools. These amendments were enacted in the 19th century during a time of anti-Catholic bigotry.)
Kendra Espinoza, Jeri Anderson, and Jamie Schafer planned to use scholarships to send their children to religious, private schools and sued the Department of Revenue asserting that the rules were discriminatory on the basis of their religious views. But the Montana Supreme Court upheld the Department’s rules.
They appealed their case to the U.S. Supreme Court.
In a 5–4 decision written by Chief Justice John Roberts and announced Tuesday, the Court held:
The application of the no-aid provision discriminated against religious schools and the families whose children attend or hope to attend them in violation of the Free Exercise Clause of the Federal Constitution.
The Institute for Justice, which represented the Montana mothers, provides a good overview of the decision’s implications and background on the case and Blaine Amendments.
IJ Senior Attorney Richard Komer, who argued that case before the court, applauded the Court’s decision. “It’s been a century-and-a-half since the bigoted Blaine movement took root in state constitutions throughout the country. Today’s decision shows that it is never too late to correct an injustice, even one with as long and ignoble a pedigree as this one.”
To be sure, the legacy of House Speaker James Blaine (and the dozens of state constitutional amendments established after his proposed federal amendment failed) has been a roadblock for equal opportunity for decades.
Allowing children to attend a school of their parents’ choice is a promising way to promote equal opportunity in education, particularly for disadvantaged children who often have no choice but to attend a government-assigned school.
But court rulings and the threat of potential legal challenges due to states’ Blaine Amendments have deterred many lawmakers from proposing and establishing programs to give parents that choice.
Following Tuesday’s Supreme Court ruling, 19th century state constitutional provisions rooted in bigotry will no longer prevent 21st century lawmakers from giving parents the freedom to choose the best school for their child and promoting equal opportunity.
