2021: A Year in Review
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to footer

NC Council of Churches

Strength in Unity, Peace through Justice

  • Voices
  • About
    • Overview
    • Staff
    • Members
    • Covenant Partners
    • Issue Statements
    • Governing Board
  • Programs
    • NC Interfaith Power & Light
      • NCIPL Overview
      • Faith in Action NCIPL
      • NCIPL Articles
      • NCIPL Resources
      • Upcoming Events for NCIPL
      • Contact NCIPL
    • Partners in Health & Wholeness
      • PHW Staff
      • Mini-Grants
      • PHW Collaborative Pledge
      • The Overdose Crisis: The Faith Community Responds
      • Mental Health Advocacy
      • BIPOC Mental Health Grant
      • Growing Communities of Inclusion: A Faithful Response to HIV
      • Citizen Science
      • PHW Articles
      • FAQs
  • Priorities
    • Racial Justice
    • The Overdose Crisis: The Faith Community Responds
    • Gun Violence Prevention
    • Criminal Justice
    • Immigrant Rights
    • Public Education
    • Farmworkers
    • Legislative Advocacy
    • Christian Unity
    • Peace
  • Events
  • Resources
    • COVID-19 Resources
    • Publications & Reports
    • Raleigh Report
    • Lectionary
    • Sermons
  • Donate
  • Council Store
  • Show Search

Search NC Council of Churches

Hide Search

Private School Vouchers, Lax Standards

Steve Ford, Former Volunteer Program Associate · August 1, 2015 · Leave a Comment

Click here to sign up to receive the Raleigh Report in your inbox

The principle of judicial restraint is a wonderful thing. It helps keep judges – as they go about their business of determining whether laws are constitutional – from horning in on the role of legislators, whose task is to make policy choices and then to enact laws reflecting those choices.

Proper restraint makes judges’ rulings more credible, gives legislators a healthy leeway and shores up our democratic system of checks and balances.

But what happens when judicial restraint becomes judicial paralysis? Then, a runaway legislature can get away with pretty much whatever it wants. Misplaced restraint can even become a form of passive aggression, whereby politically minded judges end up green-lighting laws that should have set off alarms in the courtroom.

All of which brings us to the N.C. Supreme Court and its recent decision that the state’s Opportunity Scholarship Program is perfectly in sync with the state constitution and therefore good to go.

With the court’s OK, the state is free to spend public money to subsidize some children’s attendance at non-public schools. And those schools are bound by none of the quality standards the Supreme Court itself has said are necessary to fulfill kids’ right to an education that means something.

That’s potentially sad for young people sent off to poorly regulated schools because sending them suits their parents – although of course it has to be acknowledged that in any given situation, a child who’s been struggling in a regular public school might do better in a different setting.

What’s more problematic in the larger sense is that Opportunity Scholarships – vouchers, in other words – drain both money and talent from the public school systems that most of North Carolina’s children attend.

Restraint in action

The high court’s July 23 go-ahead came in the form of a 4-3 decision, with Chief Justice Mark Martin delivering the majority opinion.  (Click here to read that opinion and two dissents.)

Martin spoke for the court’s four Republican members as they essentially ratified one of the Republican-controlled General Assembly’s most contentious policy initiatives. On the decision’s short end were the three justices of Democratic persuasion.

Martin and his colleagues were careful to say that they weren’t weighing in on the voucher program’s merits – its wisdom or likely effectiveness. As to possible ripple effects on the public schools, they ducked. Their whole take on the matter, as explicated in Martin’s opinion, boiled down to a finding that the program might pass constitutional muster in some instances – so what choice did they have but to let it continue? If a 30-page ruling ever conjured up an image of eight upturned palms and a shrug of eight shoulders, this was the time.

But even in its passivity, the ruling amounted to an attack. That’s because it overturned a previous ruling by Superior Court Judge Robert Hobgood, who declared last August that, with regards to the state constitution, Opportunity Scholarships flunked the test.

Justice Robin Hudson, in a dissent joined by her Democratic colleagues Cheri Beasley and Sam Ervin IV, recounted the gist of Hobgood’s findings. As “Undisputed Material Facts,” Hobgood concluded after a trial that:

  • Private schools receiving scholarship funds don’t have to be accredited by the State Board of Education or anyone else.
  • Teachers or principals at those schools don’t have to be licensed “or have any particular credentials, degrees, experience, or expertise in education.”
  • The schools don’t have to meet any requirements as to their curricula.
  • They don’t have to meet any required minimum instructional times.
  • They’re not prohibited from discriminating against applicants or students on the basis of religion.
  • Among the 446 private schools identified by scholarship applicants as schools they planned to attend, 332 were religious schools and 117 were independent. Among the religious schools, 194 were not accredited by any organization. Among the independent schools, 59 were not accredited.

Mindful that the state constitution specifies that public funds must be spent for public purposes, Hudson went on to echo Hobgood’s conclusion that the voucher program fails to meet that standard.

She quoted his ruling: “appropriating taxpayer funds to unaccountable schools does not accomplish a public purpose.” And, as Hobgood put it, “The General Assembly fails the children of North Carolina when they are sent with taxpayer money to private schools that have no legal obligation to teach them anything.”

Hudson acknowledged that private schools, under the constitution, don’t have to meet the same quality standards as public schools. However, she said, “When taxpayer money is used, the total absence of standards cannot be constitutional.”

Black hole beckoning

In the long-running case known as Leandro, under which the Supreme Court has clarified the extent of the state’s duty to educate its young people, public schools are supposed to provide, at a minimum, the opportunity to get a “sound basic” education. The outcome is supposed to equip them “to participate and compete in the society in which they live and work.” To meet that goal, schools must have appropriately qualified teachers and principals.

After reviewing those parameters, Hudson drilled to the heart of the voucher program’s constitutional shortcomings. She wrote: “Therefore, while students enrolled in private schools may be receiving a fine education, if taxpayer money is spent on a private school education that does not prepare them to function in and to contribute to our state’s society, that spending cannot be for ‘public purposes only.’”

“The main constitutional flaw in this program,” wrote Hudson, “is that it provides no framework at all for evaluating any of the participating schools’ contribution to public purposes; such a huge omission is a constitutional black hole into which the entire program should disappear.”

Justice Beasley fleshed out an aspect of the scholarship program that seemed to have escaped the court majority’s notice.

“In setting education policy,” she wrote in her own dissent, “the danger posed by the General Assembly in designating general funds for nonpublic education and a nonpublic purpose is that it effectively undermines the support the legislature is constitutionally obligated to provide to the public school system.

“Because the Opportunity Scholarship Program circumvents the mission of public schools to successfully offer a sound basic education to all students, the General Assembly has failed to meet the mandated minimum standard.”

As established by the legislature, students eligible for the scholarships come from families with incomes no greater than 133 percent of the federal poverty level. Successful applicants are chosen by lottery, and discrimination is barred on the basis of race, color or national origin (not religion).

The vouchers are worth up to $4,200 per student – a figure that critics say might well not be enough to cover the actual costs of attendance for children from disadvantaged families. Voucher advocates, with the judicial winds at their backs, now are pushing to broaden the eligibility rules. It’s not hard to see where this is heading.

Chief Justice Martin was adamant in insisting that his court ordinarily must defer to legislative judgments. He wrote that the court must assume laws are constitutional unless it can be shown otherwise beyond a reasonable doubt.

To be rejected, he said, a law must fail the tests of constitutionality under every possible circumstance. And since education is in the community’s best interest, educational expenditures almost by definition serve a public purpose.

So, as a hypothetical: A child from a poor, inner-city family is awarded an Opportunity Scholarship, is accepted at a well-resourced, academically superior private school in the suburbs and somehow actually manages to attend.

Her performance in the classroom is outstanding. Surely she’s receiving a “sound basic” education, partly at public expense. But what about her peers who find themselves in unaccredited religious academies where the quality of instruction is sketchy at best? Those kids’ parents may think all is well, but it’s the children who end up paying a price for the lack of enforceable standards.

Private illusions

Voucher supporters claim they are simply trying to give disadvantaged students who may be struggling in the regular public schools the same kinds of alternatives for private education enjoyed by more affluent peers. No doubt some children will make good use of that opportunity – while for others, it will be a mirage.

The case in our Supreme Court hinged on state, not federal, constitutional issues, so there is no obvious route for appeal into the federal courts. Like it or not, the voucher program is now enshrined in state law.

What remains for those who have grave doubts about the program’s legality and wisdom is to push back against pending efforts to expand the eligibility rules. Opening voucher opportunities to students from middle-class or even well-to-do families would strip the program of its fig-leaf covering as a means of advancement for the poor.

Public school advocates, including the N.C. Council of Churches and many of its allies, also can continue pressing for meaningful ways to gauge whether private schools benefiting from the program are serving their students adequately.

Today, despite the Supreme Court’s colossal don’t-look-at-us shrug, those accountability tools scarcely exist. That the court agreed to tolerate such a pitifully meager level of oversight would have been shocking if it weren’t so predictable.

Filed Under: Blog, Homepage Featured, Raleigh Report Tagged With: Children & Youth, N.C. General Assembly, Public Education

About Steve Ford, Former Volunteer Program Associate

Much goes on in North Carolina's state capital that's important to the Council of Churches. I'm glad to have a chance to help follow the action, transitioning from my career with The News & Observer of Raleigh, where I retired in 2012 as editorial page editor. I'm originally from Virginia but have lived in Cary so long I remember the Kildaire Farm barn.

Read more of my commentary here.

Reader Interactions

More Like This

Because of Jesus
The Perfect Gift for Mother’s Day
PHW Faith and Health Summit: Thank You

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Anonymous comments or comments that target individuals will not be posted (please include your first and last name). All comments must be on topic and respectful. Comments will not be posted until they have been reviewed by a moderator. Comments do not reflect the positions of the NC Council of Churches.

Footer

Contact

NC Council of Churches
27 Horne St.
Raleigh, NC 27607
(919) 828-6501
info@ncchurches.org

Facebook

Partners in Health and Wholeness

Featured

Private School Vouchers, Lax Standards

Latest Tweets

Learn what’s at stake for North Carolinians and how our courts impact our daily lives on 5/25 with @NCVCE Director, Melissa Price Kromm. The U.S. courts play such an important role in our lives no matter what the issue. #2022CriticalIssues bit.ly/3KZgi7z pic.twitter.com/1z1v…

About a day ago

Since redistricting affects who is elected to governmental bodies, the decisions about boundaries also affect policies these bodies enact. Anyone who cares about the way laws affect communities should care about this. Learn more #2022CriticalIssues bit.ly/3KZgi7z @scsj pic.twitter.com/sls7…

Last week

Through the assistance of @CarterCenter, Jennifer Roberts & Bob Orr are assembling a cross-partisan network of respected North Carolinians advocating for adherence to democratic & civic values in NC elections. Learn more & register: bit.ly/3KZgi7z #2022CriticalIssues pic.twitter.com/dCTl…

About 2 weeks ago

RT @healthactionnc Help us keep Medicaid expansion in the spotlight by joining our letter to the editor campaign. Never written an LTE before? No problem, register for our Action Hour and get all the tools you will need! bit.ly/MedExActionHo… twitter.com/healthac…

About 2 weeks ago

Our Democracy is being threatened more than ever and together we can learn the facts, educate ourselves, and preserve our democracy and protect it from those who would cause it harm. Join us for #2022CriticalIssues every day starting May 23 until May 27. bit.ly/3KZgi7z pic.twitter.com/NKKl…

About 2 weeks ago

Follow @ncchurches

Latest Tweets

RT @FaithCompassWFU Consider becoming an HIV & Faith Ambassador! To learn more, plan to join us for a virtual information session on 05/18 at 2 PM, 06/30 at 2 PM, or on 07/20 at 11 AM, all EST. Register now: bit.ly/FaithAmbInfo #faithandHIV #faithcompassWFU #transformthestory pic.twitter.com/oZo7…

About 6 days ago

Join us now Attorney General Josh Stein for a virtual conversation, “A Faith-Based harm Reduction Approach to the Opioid Crisis.” youtube.com/watch?v=…

About 2 weeks ago

RT @NCAGO Join Attorney General @JoshStein_ today at 1 p.m. for a discussion on a faith-based harm reduction approach to the opioid crisis with representatives of Olive Branch Ministries. Register here: us06web.zoom.us/webi… pic.twitter.com/XB05…

About 2 weeks ago

Register here! #phw #MentalHealthAwareness ncchurches.ourpowerb… pic.twitter.com/VTN7…

About 2 weeks ago

Please Join Us! ncchurches.ourpowerb… pic.twitter.com/KG6o…

About 2 weeks ago

Follow @healthandfaith

Latest Tweets

RT @mocleanair Read our editorial in @GeorgiaRecorder. georgiarecorder.com/… @EnergyFdn @GCVoters @cleanenergyorg @GeorgiaIPL @gasierraclub @CleanAirMoms_GA @PSEquityMatters @SouthfaceInst @GAChapterAAP @CEHN @docsforclimate @enviRN @schoolnurses @uwomenfaith @eldersclimate @NCIPL @AlabamaPJC

About a day ago

RT @mocleanair Comments due in 3 days - if you haven't submitted one yet, do it today! For tips, read our blog about the different kinds of air pollution heavy duty vehicles make. #HealthyAirIsHealthCare #CleanAir @CEHN @TheOxygenProj @eldersclimate @uwomenfaith @GeorgiaIPL @AlabamaPJC @NCIPL twitter.com/mocleana…

About a day ago

RT @WECAN_INTL 📢Today, Indigenous women leaders & 200+ groups sent a letter calling on @USACEHQ to deny the permits for Line 5, conduct a federal EIS & respect Indigenous rights! To protect communities, water & our climate we must #StopLine5. Learn more👉bit.ly/3MBazW4 pic.twitter.com/FqeQ…

About a day ago

RT @interfaithpower North Carolina congregations with @NCIPL are taking advantage of their utility's solar panel rebate program to save on their lighting and space heating and cooling costs. #Faiths4Climate #EarthWeek twitter.com/PNS_NC/s…

About 3 weeks ago

RT @scennetwork1 This past weekend, Alexander Easdale, our Executive Director, attended the Fight for Our Future rally in Washington D.C. to advocate for climate action! Read more about this event here and see if you can spot our SCEN T-shirts in one of the pictures: nytimes.com/2022/04/… pic.twitter.com/5voq…

About 3 weeks ago

Follow @ncipl

Latest Tweets

Copyright © 2022 NC Council of Churches · All Rights Reserved · Website by Tomatillo Design · Hosted by WP Engine