Oklahoma regulators have approved the charter application of the St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School, a development that is part of a larger movement towards school choice. The school will provide a Catholic, academically rigorous program and will focus on the needs of underserved, rural, and special-needs students who will receive public support. Reactions to this news have been mixed, with those who support educational pluralism and parental empowerment being supportive, and those attached to or invested in government-run schools and public-employee unions being displeased.
David French, a political conservative and longtime supporter of religious freedom and educational choice, wrote a New York Times opinion piece called “Oklahoma Breaches the Wall Separating Church and State.” French suggested that the Oklahoma Board’s decision is a troubling development that blurs lines that should be clear. He believes that charter schools in Oklahoma are arms of the government and to “create state religious schools” violates the First Amendment’s establishment clause.
While French is right about many things, our Constitution permits reasonable and productive cooperation between governments and religious institutions. The public good of our communities is promoted in countless ways by faith-based hospitals, universities, schools, shelters, and soup kitchens, and this beneficial cooperation is entirely consistent with secular government. Religious institutions are free to be religious, even when they partner with governments.
It is essential to understand that Oklahoma’s approval of St. Isidore’s application does not violate the principle that secular and religious authorities are, and should be, distinct. In Oklahoma, charter schools do not function as state schools. The fundamental premise of St. Isidore’s application, and of the board’s approval, is that St. Isidore is not clothed with state authority merely because it receives state funds.
As French mentions, a federal appeals court has ruled, in Peltier v. Charter Day School, that a charter school in North Carolina is a state actor and therefore bound by the 14th Amendment’s equal-protection clause. However, several federal court rulings have gone the other way, and the question depends on the specifics of a particular state’s charter-school rules. The Supreme Court has made clear that governments may not discriminate against religious institutions that are otherwise eligible for public benefits and contracts.
No state is required to fund religious schools, but once a state decides to open up education funding to non-state schools, it may not discriminate against qualified schools simply for being religious. The appropriate distinction between church and state is not transgressed by equal treatment and evenhandedness. No child would be assigned to St. Isidore; the educational decision for St. Isidore belongs to parents, as educational decisions should.
