Big Sky Times

Montana’s tax credit program for private school education cannot exclude using the money for religious schools, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on June 30.

The implications of Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue affect school choice across the country, a point of contention among teachers’ unions and families who seek other education options yet can’t afford them without financial help.

The 5-4 ruling, written by Chief Justice John Roberts, overturned a 2018 Montana Supreme Court decision that had prevented Kendra Espinoza and other parents from accessing a tax credit program to help fund their children’s tuition at the nondenominational Stillwater Christian School in Kalispell.

“A State need not subsidize private education. But once a State decides to do so, it cannot disqualify some private schools solely because they are religious,” Roberts wrote in the majority opinion, which split along party lines.

The court held that under the Free Exercise clause, the government can’t infringe on the First Amendment right to freely exercise religion.

“Our cases have long recognized the importance of protecting religious actions, not just religious status,” Roberts wrote. “In its very first decision applying the Free Exercise Clause to the States, the Court explained that the First Amendment protects the ‘freedom to act’ as well as the ‘freedom to believe.’ Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296, 303 (1940).”

“The main result of this is that it solidifies – if you’re going to have private school choice – you’re not allowed to discriminate against families wanting to use the dollars for private religious schools,” Corey A. DeAngelis, director of School Choice at the Reason Foundation, told the Big Sky Times.

“The Montana Supreme Court had ruled against that, but the U.S. Supreme Court held that excluding religious schools from school choice programs is unconstitutional,” he said.

The implications go far beyond Montana.

“In states with similar programs, like Maine and New Hampshire, this ruling changes those as well,” DeAngelis said. “Before the ruling, the law in those states said you can only use the tuition for non-religious private schools, but now families in those states can use those dollars to send their children to religious private schools as well.”

DeAngelis said that the ruling also addressed that banning of religious schools infringes on the 14th Amendment.

“If you exclude religious schools then you are arguably discriminating against religious groups,” he said.

The ruling also deals a significant blow to the “Blaine Amendments,” which date from late 19th century anti-Catholic sentiment that prohibited public funding of Catholic schools, and still exist in 37 state constitutions.

The White House issued a statement praising the court’s decision.

“The Trump Administration believes that school choice is a civil rights issue, and that no parent should be forced to send their child to a failing school. President Donald J. Trump will fight for school choice, and he will always defend our first freedom: the free exercise of religion,” the office of Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany said.

DeAngelis said the ruling was not unexpected, given earlier Supreme Court decisions, including a 2002 case, Zelman vs. Simmons Harris.

“In that 5-4 decision, the court ruled that families using tuition vouchers can choose religious or non-religious schools, similar to Pell Grants at the university level,” DeAngelis said.