Supreme Court lets stand religious charter school decision

WASHINGTON (BP)—The U.S. Supreme Court could not find five votes for either side in an appeal that would have established the first state-supported religious charter school in the nation, the court announced.

The 4-4 split, made possible by Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s recusal, allowed to stand the lower court’s decision that it would be unconstitutional for St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School in Oklahoma City to be established with public funds.

“The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court,” the court said in its ruling May 22, with no further explanation of which justices would affirm or deny the appellants’ request. “Justice Barrett took no part in the consideration or decision of these cases.”

The court heard oral arguments in the matter April 30, when St. Isadore of Seville Catholic Virtual School, the Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board and others appealed the Oklahoma Supreme Court’s June 2024 ruling.

In the appeal, the petitioners said they were denied the benefit of opening a charter school “for no reason other than that they are religious,” according to documents filed with the court.

The Archdiocese of Oklahoma City and the Roman Catholic Diocese of Tulsa had sought since 2022 to establish the school. The application first was blocked in April 2023, with the Oklahoma Statewide Virtual Charter School Board citing a problem with the application. But a second application was approved two months later.

State Attorney General Gentner Drummond appealed the decision to the State Supreme Court, successfully overturning the school board’s ruling.

“Under Oklahoma law, a charter school is a public school. As such, a charter school must be nonsectarian,” the Oklahoma Supreme Court said in its June 2024 ruling the Supreme Court left in place. “However, St. Isidore will evangelize the Catholic faith as part of its school curriculum while sponsored by the State.

“This State’s establishment of a religious charter school violates Oklahoma statutes, the Oklahoma Constitution, and the Establishment Clause. St. Isidore cannot justify its creation by invoking Free Exercise rights as a religious entity.”

Advocates, opponents weigh in

St. Isidore of Seville School had gained support from Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt, attorneys general from a dozen states, and legal advocacy groups including Becket, Alliance Defending Freedom and First Liberty Institute.

“We are disappointed, but the result of this 4-4 decision with no opinion is that the fight against religious bigotry will continue in Oklahoma and across the country,” said Hiram Sasser, executive general counsel for Plano-based First Liberty. “We will not stop until we can bring an end to religious discrimination in education.”

In contrast, Holly Hollman, general counsel for the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty, said the court’s deadlock “means an important principle remains intact: the government cannot operate a religious school, nor can it directly sponsor, promote or pay for religious education.”

“The Oklahoma decision rightly affirmed that charter schools are public schools. And public schools are where we’ve shown the greatest clarity about religious freedom: they don’t conduct religious exercises, compel prayer, or make students feel excluded based on their beliefs,” Hollman said.

“Instead, they reflect the true promise of pluralism—where students can learn about diverse faiths and prepare to participate in a shared democracy.

“This outcome helps preserve that promise. And it ensures that our public institutions remain open to all, not captured by any one religious mission.”

Richard Land, former president of the Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, cautioned against the use of public funds to establish religious charter schools, regardless of the denomination or faith endorsed.

“Let me be clear that I would oppose a ‘Baptist’ charter school just as vehemently as I oppose a Catholic charter school,” Land wrote in a March 21 article for Baptist Press. “Indeed, I would oppose it because I am a Baptist and I believe in separation of church and state.”

With additional reporting by Managing Editor Ken Camp.