St. Isidore of Seville may have overcome every obstacle in bringing knowledge and education to the world, but he could not overcome a tie on the Supreme Court. With the recusal of Justice Amy Coney Barrett, St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School in Oklahoma City lost by default when the Court deadlocked on its constitutional challenge to being denied a charter in favor of secular schools. Tied 4-4, the result is that the lower court ruling stands against the school.
Everything about the decision is frustrating for those looking for greater clarity in this area. Not only did the Court deadlock, but it also issued only a one-sentence ruling upholding the lower court’s decision, saying only: “The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court.”
Brevity may be “the soul of wit” to Shakespeare, but it is the bane of constitutional scholars who want to understand where the line is drawn in such cases.
It is not even confirmed which justice joined the liberal justices in producing the deadlock. With Barrett out, a conservative still had to join Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson to produce this result.
We still do not know why Barrett recused herself. Frankly, the public should be informed when a justice leaves the highest court with an even number of members with the danger of such a deadlock. I understand that some information might be withheld for the privacy of justices, but some general explanation would seem in order on the nature of the reason.
My assumption is that it was either Chief Justice Roberts or Justice Kavanaugh who supplied the fourth vote with a slight edge to Roberts. However, we are not informed of the identities any more than the rationales of the justices.
No one should be satisfied with any of this. Barrett’s reason should be a matter of public record as should be the identity of the justices voting on both sides. Then, there is the little matter of a lack of an actual opinion to go with the announced result. Instead, the public is given an order shorter than a notice from the DMV that a license renewal is due.
The order is even too short for a Haiku by two syllables and two lines.
Barrett is proving to be a disaster on the Court. This is what happens when you pick a religious zealot. I hope that Trump isn’t putting too much faith in the SC stepping in to reign in the army of leftist judges out there. I don’t see it happening. The process is too slow and the rulings are unpredictable. Trump needs to move forward with whatever he plans to do regarding deportations, mass firings, etc. He isn’t going to get a better chance than this. “Legal” or not, it doesn’t really matter. Trump has total immunity and it appears that blanket pardons for his staff are just fine.
If I was on the Senate Judiciary Committee interviewing a potential Supreme Court nominee, my first question would be. “Yes or No, can you be intimidated by the Brown Shirts?”
The brown shirts today and in the 30’s were/are socialists.
With everything that has occurred under CJ Robert’s term, I am now convinced that the Judicial Branch has become a rouge organization that has be hijacked by unethical and anti-Constitutional members!!!!! It will go down in history as the Robert’s Court of destruction!!!!!!!!!
As a now eighty-one year old lay American male who was required to learn the US Constitution, twice, before graduating a small town Illinois high school in 1962 and swearing to ‘support and defend it from all enemies both foreign and domestic (mostly, now)’ when enlisting in the US Navy in 1964, and has been battling externally imposed mostly minor (now) chronic illnesses for forty-four years and counting with a family history of dementia but without personally relying on any regular prescription treatments, yet, I find that Biden’s apparent dementia (like a lot of premature [younger than I] celebrity disability and/or mortality) could have been cheaply and easily prevented if the FDA wasn’t the instigator and had listened to me and some twenty thousand others before me (website counter in the day) about the true toxicity of added MSG (monosodium glutamate) by October of 2005.
Prior to that FDA approval it appears that most cases of those conditions resulted from still medically unrecognized and undiagnosed nearly subclinical non-IgE-mediated food and food additive sensitivities or allergies (e.g., Dr. Arthur F. Coca, by 1935). Precedent (intentional) Trump appears likely to succumb too (already?) by the end of this term, despite multiple personal efforts to inform him and/or RFK, Jr. of my lay senior findings, with no replies. For me it also begs the question: “How badly affected now are any/all of the SCOTUS Justices? For more details/personal perspectives and/or to contact me directly through the “About” page of my ad free video channel: https://odysee.com/@charlesgshaver:d?view=about CGS
Ano
Trump appears likely to succumb too (already?) by the end of this term, despite multiple personal efforts to inform him and/or RFK, Jr. of my lay senior findings,
Talk about reaching.
You appear to be able to read so why not check-out what I share freely on the “About” page of my ad-free video channel; experience and online research based. Anonymous, below, I estimate at least half of the annual costs for healthcare in the US could be saved by fixing our food supply and preventing most chronic diseases. Following a phony $7Trillion Covid-19 pandemic, I think a very heavy ‘gold’ medal would be rather reasonable.
So, you want a medal?
I disagree with Prof. Turley.
The justices’ power to withhold the reason for their recusal is very wise. We should presume that Justice Barrett acted with decency and good faith in refusing to become the deciding vote, creating a ruling that actually ran counter to her own personal views on the matter.
“John Roberts is not a judge. He is a mediator. He issues a conservative ruling against the MSPB and the NLRB (which frankly no one cares about) but issues a liberal advisory opinion in favor of the Fed (which everyone cares about)….”
“These sorts of rulings do nothing to instill confidence in the Court as an actual legal body”
https://reason.com/volokh/2025/05/22/roberts-swings-to-the-left-in-st-isidore-to-the-right-in-wilcox
With this Court and the maniacs in the lower courts the nation may drift aimlessly like brush on the river into a constitutional crisis.
Perhaps it is time to start asking if any of Biden’s judicial appointments are legitimate.
How many judges were appointed by President Autopen? Should they be extracted? Some of them don’t appear to have been chosen by any intelligent selection process.
Good. I don’t want my tax payer money going to Christian madrassas.
Sp you enjoy poor and very expensive schools that teach nothing to our children. How lib of you
Well of course not. Better to send your taxes to the same failed public education system that taught you there was such a thing as Christian Madrasas.
Agreed. Public funds should not go to schools.
Public education is neither a constitutional power of government nor a right.
All these constitutional conflicts go away when government does not try to be all things to all people.
The reason that government is limited is specifically to avoid confilicts such as these.
YOU should not have to pay for the education of ANYONE else’s children.
YOU have the RIGHT to educate your own children int he way you see fit.
If you want to send your kids to Tinker Bell PresSchool where your kids are told that boys can be girls and pink elephants can fly – that is your business. If someone else wishes to send their kids to an actual islamic Madrassa – that is their business.
Government should have no role in the social, political, or religious indoctrination of children.
There are only two choices.
Government can not participate in the education of children, or it can not disfavor religious schools.
Frankly BOTH are true.
The first amendment prohibits government from favoring a specific religion, That text does NOT support government favoring atheism over other religions.
The first amendment requires Strict scrutiny – that means that government can not infringe on a first amendment right when there is any other alternative – even a undesireable one.
There is CLEARLY another alternative to screwing religiously affiliated charters.
That is removing government from education.
So many constitutional issues go away entirely when government gets out of nonsense that is not its business.
All the talking in the World isn’t going to give us a better SC. Time is coming where it will just be ignored.
How in the world can an impartial Supreme Court, or any other, read the law and come to various and separate opinions?
Ridiculous, law is only written one way with one “manifest tenor.”
What a joke it all is.
If I recall correctly, Justice Barrett’s children attend private Catholic school, and she is an active member of the Catholic community.
What are the rules of recusal? Hypothetically, would a Muslim Justice need to recuse himself from any cases involving mosques or Islamic private schools?
We do not know why Barrett Recused.
While she could have recused for the reasons you specified – that seems highly unlikely.
Generally there must be a specific reason that a judge can not particpate in a specific case.
Such as having contributed to this specific school, or raised funds for them, or provided legal advice to this school.
That is why Turley says this case will be back soon enough with a slightly different plantiff
While Barrett gets to decide when she will recuse it is highly unlikely that she will recuse from all religious charter cases or even more narrowly all catholic religious charter cases.
Why did the Supreme Court even take on this case if one justice was going to recuse? This was a waste of time.
Isn’t there another case on its heels of this? There will be. Barrett can stay in it because she’s not Muslim nor protestant.
It’s so muddy with metaphysics best wishes on getting anything right.
What the Supreme Court does not understand is that the education industry is a function of private property free enterprises in the free markets of the private sector.
No governmental level may deny the right to private property, free enterprises, free industries, and free markets, including but not limited to the education industry.
The justices simply want to conduct redistribution of wealth and social engineering through the antithetical and unconstitutional regulation and communization of education.
Why doesn’t the Supreme Court order the nationalization of doughnut shops?
Dear Anonymous: at 7:38,
“… Why doesn’t the Supreme Court order the nationalization of doughnut shops? …”
Heads-Up … You’re going to get a visit from a few “Boys in Blue” very very soon.
The Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) is the world’s largest organization of sworn law enforcement officers, with over 377,000 members in more than 2,200 lodges. It aims to improve working conditions for officers and ensure public safety through education, legislation, community involvement, and employee representation. The FOP also provides a variety of benefits to its members, including legal coverage and access to educational resources and Doughnut Shops.
https://fop.net/about-the-fop/
R u serious? 😂
8 is fine. The opinion could have been 7 to 1.
Not an issue.
Jonathan: As a practicing Catholic I can understand why it is “frustrating” for you that the SC tied in the St. Isidore of Seville case. We know it was Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh who think public money should be used for religious indoctrination. With Coney Barrett’s recusal it appears Roberts sided with the liberal wing of the Court. No doubt the religious right will accuse him of being a “traitor”.
Contrary to what you think a SC Justice does not have to explain their recusal. But I would imagine that because of her membership in a small Catholic sect Barrett has close ties to St. Isidore and that mandated her recusal. Nor is the Court required to issue an opinion in a 4-4 tie. So the ruling of the lower court stands without any comment and without knowing how the vote went.
So for now the ruling of the Oklahoma SC stands and St. Isidore is not entitled to use public money for religious indoctrination under the Establishment Clause. That’s as it should be. Because using public money to teach kids that Jesus is the Son of God and abortion is a “sin” is not exactly my idea of “bringing knowledge and education to the world”!
So for now the ruling of the Oklahoma SC stands and St. Isidore is not entitled to use public money for religious indoctrination under the Establishment Clause.
Setting aside the fact the establishment clause says nothing about religious “indoctrination”, it does protect the free exercise of religion. The 14th amendment’s equal protection clause shall guarantee that our government treats religious and secular beliefs without discrimination. However that is not what is happening. Public funds are being used to provide for secular education, while religious education is shutout of public funding. To right this violation, the government needs to provide public funds with equal consideration to secular and religious education programs, or not use public funds for any education programs.
Aren’t education and religion two separate categories? Religious educations are done historically on Sundays in churches? The teach morality? Do churches teach algebra on Sunday mornings?
Is the objection to the current public schools an interpretation of secular that teaches immorality? Is that the issue?
I fail to comprehend the innate mixture of education and religion? The out here is that all religions would be taught at various charters? The establishment clause doesn’t have a number attached? All or none? Public funds used to teach any religion is establishing a religion?
Can States have their own interps? Is only federal money tied up? But then someone would file a lawsuit against bibles in public schools I suppose.
Right now atheism is being taught in public schools and yes, atheism is a belief about an after life or reincarnation in that it believes there is none. There is no proof of that. The proof of religious after lives is by testimony of those who’ve come back from death. They’re rare.
Take atheism out of schools? The religion of atheism is objectionable.
That’s the true problem. Teaching atheism in schools is the problem.
Someone post a link to the lower courts opinion. Of course scotus didn’t say it agreed but it’s holding by default.
Life is so very short
And the burdens of these vanities are wearisome. Go to church on Sundays and teach only math, science, classic literature, languages, American history in schools. Publish a catalogue of computer courses for further study at a cheap price as course work and tutorials for home use.
I fail to comprehend the innate mixture of education and religion?
Let me help you out there.
Religious educational programs have all the same foundational requirements to graduate as secular programs. Religious systems merely add to the curriculum something that parents want provided for their children.
Public funding of education should be provided under equal consideration for secular and non-secular education programs. Ultimately, no public funding should go to any system that fails to achieve the fundamental purpose of public education.
“Public funding of education should be provided under equal consideration for secular and non-secular education programs.”
And this is the crux of the matter that secular leftists disregard, and without any understanding of the original context [separation of church and state”] or its real meaning: the right to bring religious convictions into the public square, with protection against the government’s preference or endorsement of one religion—and the base of this religious pluralism was CHRISTIANITY.
“Aren’t education and religion two separate categories? ”
Absolutely positively not.
The concept of secular education is unique to the last 100+ years.
Most religions have a day of worship. That is not primarily a day of religious education.
It is a day of rest not work. The WORK of religion – including religious education primarly take place the other 6 days.
Catholic and other religious schools teach religion and they teach algebra.
They do so for less than 1/5th the cost of public education, and they do so with better overall results than public schools.
What is the purpose of education ? Is it to prepare children to be succcessful as adults and good citizens ? Or is it to protect them from concepts like morality and religion ?
If we judge education by outcomes – religious education serves the public interest far better than governmnt run schools
I am not sure why this would surprises anyone.
Why would anyone beleive that any task that does not require govenment is not done best outside of government ? History teaches us otherwise. Public Choice theory demonstrates otherwise, and logic dictates that Government MUST be inefficient at anything it does – because the efficient use of FORCE is very dangerous. Nazi’s are an excellent example of efficient government.
“Religious educations are done historically on Sundays in churches?”
Nope,
“Do churches teach algebra on Sunday mornings?”
No church schools teach Algebra monday through friday with greater success than public schools and at far lower cost.
“Is the objection to the current public schools an interpretation of secular that teaches immorality? Is that the issue?”
Education is absolutely NOT the role of government.
Whether those of you on the left like it or not – humans are inherently religious creatures – even atheists are religious. The left in this country today – whether church going or not, are dogmatically religious. It is as noted before an inherent part of human nature.
You can removed churches from government – but it is impossible to extract religion – humans are inherently religious. The purpose of the establishment clause is NOT to thwart religion, it is to preclude the incorporation of or creation of a government religion.
And our public schools today are proof that has failed. Many US public schools are ferverently religiously dogmatic. They are just not indoctrinating the religion of a traditional church.
The purpose of the establishment clause is to prevent the problem that we have created with public schools. The creation or adoption of a government religion.
“I fail to comprehend the innate mixture of education and religion?”
So ? Self evidently you fail to comprehend lots of things.
Your failure to comprehend things does not alter them.
“The out here is that all religions would be taught at various charters?”
No the establishment clause is to thwart what we already have – a government religion.
And the reason for doing so was the horrid experiences our forefathers had in the religious wars in Europe. The US is in the earliest phase of repeating exactly that mistake.
“The establishment clause doesn’t have a number attached?”
Of course it does – that number is ONE. Government can not establish ONE religion.
It can neither favor nor disfavor any religion.
“The concept of secular education is unique to the last 100+ years.”
Except, of course, for the entirety of ancient Greece and Rome.
Wrong
They taught religion as well.
Get educated.
“They taught religion as well.”
Really? They taught Christianity, et al.? It’s amazing what one can learn from keyboard warriors.
BTW, secular schools teach (actual) religion (as opposed to the Greek gods). I don’t think you understand the difference between “secular” and “religious” education.
“Except, of course, for the entirety of ancient Greece and Rome.”
They didn’t have public education.
Just get Government out of education and other areas where it colides with religion and other constitutional rights.
Yes. We’re not a startup country any longer. We should be privatizing at every opportunity. In incentive theory, tax to get less of something, subsidize to get more. Ironically, we get taxed so the government can subsidize a failed public education system. Alternatively, they refuse to subsidize proven Christian education systems. My Church has a K-12 school. Many of those parents pay for this Christian School even though public schools are readily available and even though they aren’t religious.
What are your thoughts on the death penalty and euthanasia, Dennis.
Who cares. He is an idiot.
There are many, many like him. It must be considered as job opportunities are created and education must consider the range of abilities. The problem in the US now is the considerably low intelligence. Planes crash and trains wreck. Some idiot just crashed a jet in poor weather with- well give it a try. What were the odds.
Indoctrination, Dennis? You think public money should only be used for the religious-socialists’ right to indoctrinate other peoples children into extreme-leftist ideology and activism? You’re sorely mistaken if you think purple-haired teachers are not cultists, pushing their own kind of dark indoctrination.
You people have ALWAYS had “separation of church and state” all wrong. Those who want their children to be trained in better schools with higher moral codes are nevertheless taxpayers, who provide “public money,” who can and should exercise the right to freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion in any matter, including education.
“We know it was Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh who think public money should be used for religious indoctrination. ”
We do ? Regardless, that is NOT the question presented.
Further YOU seem to believe that public money can be used for the the religious indoctrination of gay and trans communities. Do you think that there most be a metaphysical god for something to be a religion ?
Regardless the establishment clause bars Government from Favoring a specific religion.
There is no requirement in the first amendment for government to be hostile to religion.
Out money says “In God We Trust” – and you left wing nuts LOST that case.
This is not fundimentally different.
Regardless, first amendment rights require strict scrutiny – that means that when there is ANY alternative that allows government to accomplish it purposes that does not infringe – Government MUST take that alternative.
In this and numerous other cases involving religion there is a TRIVIAL alternative.
When government can not act without interfering with religion – Goverrment can not act.
The correct SCOTUS ruling would be public education violates the constitution.
SCOTUS has unfortunately gotten this wrong constantly.
When cases involving government screwing over religion come before it SCOTUS keeps deciding that govenrment must create a carve out to protect religion. See the Little Sisters of the Poor case or numerous similar cases.
But the answer int eh Little Sisters of the Poor case was trivial – If a law passed by congress is not constitutional without a judicially mandated carve out for people practicing their religion – then the law is itself unconstitutional. In the Little Sisters of the Poor case – the ACA is unconstitutional – for ANOTHER REASON, because it infringes on religion.
The same is true of pretty much ALL Government “charity” – that is govenrment interfering in the domain of religion. And any domain that government enters ultimately anything that is not government ultimately gets forced out of.
Pre the EMLTA in the 80’s 1/3 of all hospitals in the US were catholic and many others were charitable. Between the EMLTA and PPACA, there are only a handful of Catholic or charitable hospitals left in the US.
We are doing the same thing in domains like soup kitchens, drug rehabilitation, ….
Left Wing nuts decide that government should fund those things, and ultimately not only are all private charities – even non-religious ones driven out, But left wing loons dicatate in great detail the VALUES that the government charity MUST indoctrinate.
Groups like AA are barred from using their 12 step programs in some states – because left wing nuts are offended by some tenents.
But this is what happens when idiots like YOU shill their values by force on the rest of us.
You are under the idiotic delusion that barring churches from Education thwarts religious indoctrination. But the FACT is that the Left has concosted its Own religion. While that religion has no metaphysical god, it is as dogmatic as Islam or Catholicism.
Our Children are taught that men can be women by wishing it so. They are taught that some races are bad, they are taught that people who never owned slaves owe vast amounts of money to people who never were slaves. They are taught that things like food, shelter, healthcare that NO ONE will have unless most of us work to provide them are an entitlement,
While speech that some people are bothered by is not.
The left has taken over many of our schools and made them into religious institutions.
And you have a problem with some catholic charter school?
Humans are inherently religious creatures. There is no actual atheist culture in all of human existence. As I noted above – even the modern left which does not beleive in god is atleast as religiously dogmatic as Islam or the catholic church.
As is typical Dennis – your posts are filled from end to end with imagining and appearances.
It is even possible that you are right, but you conflate your guesses with reality – with facts – as you typically do, and that constantly leads you astray.
We know that Barrett recused herself – and as you correctly point out as she did NOT explain, we can only GUESS why.
At this time we do NOT know how the other justices individually voted – we MIGHT in the future. But trying to guess justices votes and then extrapolate meaning and what that says for the future is a fools game.
“So for now the ruling of the Oklahoma SC stands and St. Isidore is not entitled to use public money for religious indoctrination under the Establishment Clause. That’s as it should be. Because using public money to teach kids that Jesus is the Son of God and abortion is a “sin” is not exactly my idea of “bringing knowledge and education to the world”!”
Nor is teaching children that boys can be girls, or that there are myriads of sexes, or that one races is superior to another things that public money should be used for.
The simplest solution to so many problems where government interferes with the constitutional rights of minorities is to get govenrment out of domains it does not belong.
I do not give a Schiff abotu St. Isadores. But I absolutely care that government should not only NOT have a monopoly on educating our children but that it is FAR MORE DANGEROUS to have govenrment deciding what falues our children should be indoctrinated with than to have St. Isadores make that choice.
Amy Commie Barrett only recused herself so that the Marxists could prevail. It was all just a set up so that she could pretend to be a “conservative,” when the creature is really just a Marxist lowlife. As for closeted homosexual John Roberts, he can always be relied upon to favor a Marxist decision. The Deep State has the goods on the Roberts creature, so he obediently does their bidding every time. As for Kagan, Jackson, and Sotomayor, they were Marxist Deep State appointees and they ONLY make decisions based solely on whether the decision advances the Deep State’s Marxist IslamoCommuNazi agenda.
You give way too much credit where none is due.
How long can this judicial branch last?
It’s odd how “liberal” justices continue to vote against Catholic schools.
For many years, it has appeared that the Catholic schools do a better job educating black children, esp. boys, than government (not “public”) schools. See https://www.scirp.org/pdf/jss_ 2020052815454090.pdf (“While studies have demonstrated differences across Catholic schools in academic preparation (Fenzel & Domingues, 2009), Catholic schools nevertheless have overall provided a better foundation for low-income minority students than other alternatives (Keith & Page, 1985; Fenzel & Dominguez, 2009). While many models have tried to emulate Catholic schools in providing smaller classes and better quality school climates, differences nevertheless remain (Covey, 1992). Those differences that remain may in part be due to what has been referred to as Catholic school culture (Cook, 2001), a culture rooted in the identity of Catholic schools to foster academic excellence, religious mission, and globalness/multiculturalism with a faith-based mission being at the very core of Catholic tradition.)
If the media narrative is true — Republicans “hate” black people and Democrats “love” them” — shouldn’t Republican-appointed judges be against vouchers for Catholic schools and Democrat-appointed judges be in favor of them?
“Liberal” = “Wrong”
If the American Founders and Framers—the men who created and established this country and its law—were anything, they were conservative.
The Marxists (whom you call liberals, Democrats, RINOs, etc.) aren’t interested in education. They HATE it. The only thing they love is Marxist indoctrination. They have alreaedy largely achieved their goal of transforming colleges, universities, and public schools into Leftist Indoctrination Entities (aka “LIEs”). They want ALL former educational institutions to become LIEs. They have facts, evidence, history, creativity, and invention. They ONLY love Marxism.
What they LOVE is “free stuff” and “free status.”
That is, free financial assistance and free affirmative action.
What they hate is the dominion of merit and reliance on the self.
Edward – the data on the performance of catholic schools is DAMNING to the left – which is why like catholic charity and catholic hospitals they must be destroyed. Govenrment does not tolerate competion in any domain it enters – which is one of the many reasons that we are supposed to have LIMITED government.
But most private religious and non-religious schools outperform public schools.
Even Public charter schools outperform public schools.
The reason for the fixation on Catholic schools is because the single largest non-public school system in the US is catholic schools. One can discount the incredible performance of menonite schools – as outside of a few counties in the US most people will never see a menonite school.
The left can discount the performance of various other religiously affiliated or secular private education – because again most of it is small, and arguments can be made – usually false ones,
that somehow that schools outperform public schools because they cherry pick or they have fewer minorities or fewer poor.
Those arguments are usually false. But the left can usually succeed in preventing people from looking deeply enough to grasp that.
The number of catholic schools and catholic students is just too large fro the left to ignore,
and they general public KNOWS that catholic schools are NOT cherry picking the smart kids.
There are wealthy catholic parishes and there are very poor catholic parishes. Further a significant portion of students in catholic schools are NOT catholic – and they are often very poor.
And still catholic schools outperform public schools for about 1/5 the cost
And that exposes another left wing boondoggle. And THAT is why the left MUST destroy catholic schools.
Goodness me! ACB coming in with the major bowl of disappointment
She and the other justice who joined the woman-who-cannot-define-a-woman and the other 2 dyed in the wool lefties.
Professor Turley,
No “clarity” was ever needed here. Public schools are by definition, PUBLIC SCHOOLS which are instrumentalities of the state. SCOTUS was clear in Carson that Maine’s non-sectarian requirement would have been upheld had the schools in question been public.
Please cite for any legal basis.
What has been done by “PUBLIC SCHOOLS” is to unconstitutionally deny an entire constitutional free market industry to the private property free enterprises of free Americans.
K-12 may only be provided by the free enterprise, free market, private sector education industry.
Education and its regulation are not mandated or allowed by the Constitution.
Education is not and may not be taxed for or funded as debt, defense, or “general Welfare,” per Article 1, Section 8, understanding that only 16% of the population attends K-12.
No state or local government may constrain or deny the free market, free enterprise, private property education industry, or act to diminish its viability.
No state or local government may participate in or regulate the constitutional free market, free enterprise, private property education industry.
Education is not a governmental emergency service such as police and fire.
Harvard, Stanford et al. are examples of participation in the free market, free enterprise, private property, education industry.
So-called “labor” unions are illegal and unconstitutional criminal organizations that are prohibited from entering into legal contracts; unions engage in breach of contract, refuse to provide labor, fail to appear for assignments, engage in criminal trespass, harass and intimidate individuals, cause public disturbance, commit vandalism, cause property damage, etc.
I’m saddened by this result. But I was worried about a Catholic school losing its autonomy and independence over its curriculum if it did attain charter school status. Would it be forced to comply to all policies issued to public schools because it received government funds? Would it lose the ability to retain its unique “Catholic” principles? If so, I’m not sure that this was such a bad result.
Your fears are likely justified.
My daughter had learning disabilities as a result of 2 years in a chinese orphange.
For 5 years in public school she got wonderful teachers and performed incredibly well.
In 4th grade she got what my wife and I called the “team of teachers from h311”
They treated her disabilities as evidence of stupidity. The consequence was that she did badly and was miserable. We HAD to do something – anything.
After lots of research adn visits to a variety of schools we put her into a cyber charter.
Technically these are “public schools”. Anyway this was over 20 years ago and cyber charters were only a few years old. They were RADICALLY different, one CORE value was proceed at your own pace. Each studen was required to master each unit before they could move on to the next.
Students proceeded at their own pace in each subject. This worked well for many students and for our daughter. But over the next decade as Cyber charters became more and more successful they also becaue more and more regulated. By the time my daughter graduated (with a 3.91 GPA) procede at your own pace was gone and a cyber charter education was little different from a brick and mortar education EXCEPT essentially over Zoom from a laptop. Still somehow cyber charters continued to outperform other public schools. Worse still for the left, they had become dumping grounds. The traditional public schools dumped special education students on cyber charters. They dumped handicapped students on cyber charters. They dumped discipline problems on cyber charters – because this saved traditional public schools the costs of dealing with difficult students and cyber charters were especially good at exactly that.
And STILL cyber charters outperformed public schools.
I would note that there has always been a disproportionate number of minority students from failed public schools – but these were not dumped on cyber charters.
Poor single mothers sought cyber charters as the only best hope their kids would do better than they had – and cyber charters delivered. My daughters cyber charter had 40% of students from failed public school districts.
Regardless, your point that entanglement with government will work towards the destruction of what is good in private schools is very relevant.
It is precisely what is wrong with our public schools – they have become one size fits all indoctrination centers with little interest in education.
How about taking the atheism out of public schools, oops, secular atheist schools. That works, too.
Pare it back to a BASIC education and lower taxes making it possible to send your child with extra income to additional religious classes daily which are available now for a mere 100 dollars as well as other classes online as tutorials but you’d rather the 100 dollar class cost 10,000 dollars cause it’s FREE.
Ridiculous court…
How about taking the communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs, AINOs) out of public schools and allowing education to function as the constitutional free market, free enterprise, private property education industry?
I’ll hazard a guess. Because people are poor and couldn’t afford any education at all. Property owners in States pay for the current charity schools the poor enjoy currently. You know, the free schools.
Too bad. I was hoping a group in okkkiefinnnokkki would start a state funded charter school based on satanism.
Perhaps Obongo’s parasitic appetite is greater as he, rather than create wealth, attempts to seize that of others, the very nature of a doltish Marxist “community organizer” based in communism.
A minor loss. The wave surges on. Must we always get so worked up over everything? This decision will not have the Leftists dancing in the streets over their extremely limited victory. The deadlock does not provide language to be cited in future cases as a precedent. The brevity of the language is a feature, not a bug, as they say. If and when it comes before the court again, it is not likely that a justice will feel the need to recuse. Relax.