Court Rules Against South Carolina Education Scholarship Fund, Impacting School Choice Options

COLUMBIA, S.C. — Court Ruling Sends Shockwaves Through School Choice Community

On August 1, South Carolina’s State Superintendent of Education, Ellen Weaver, made a visit to The Farm at Florence 1 Schools to discuss important education funding issues. Little did she know that just days later, the landscape of educational choice in the state would shift dramatically with a ruling from the state Supreme Court.

This past Wednesday, the court ruled against the 2023 Education Scholarship Trust Fund Act, a plan that had aimed to provide much-needed financial assistance to families wishing to send their children to private schools. The majority decision, which was split 3-2, stated that parts of this act were unconstitutional because they violated the state’s “no-aid” clause, which prohibits using public funds for the direct benefit of private schools.

A Look at the Ruling

The ruling was penned by Justice Gary Hill and supported by acting Justices Donald Beatty and James Lockemy. In a strong dissent, Chief Justice John Kittredge and Justice John Few argued against the majority’s opinion. This court decision was based on Section 4 of Article XI of the South Carolina Constitution, which aims to keep public funds strictly within public education systems.

The lawsuit was brought forth by a coalition of public school parents and organizations like the South Carolina NAACP and the South Carolina Education Association who sought to challenge the act. The state officials listed as defendants included Governor Henry McMaster, Senate President Thomas Alexander, House Speaker Murrell Smith, and State Treasurer Curtis Loftis, along with Superintendent Weaver.

The Disappointment from State Leaders

Upon hearing the court’s decision, state leaders expressed their disappointment, particularly highlighting how this ruling could greatly inconvenience families who had already started making plans for this school year. “The late timing of this ruling wreaks havoc on the participating students and their families,” Weaver commented in a statement following the decision.

The controversial Education Scholarship Trust Fund was designed to offer $6,000 vouchers to eligible families that opted to move their children from public schools to private institutions or even to other public schools outside their local districts. However, the court’s ruling added a layer of complexity to this plan, determining that the funds originally deemed public would still be categorized as such after being transferred to a trust fund.

Legal Back and Forth

State officials defending the law maintained that while funds start as public money, they turn private once placed in a designated account for eligible families to use exclusively for educational purposes. In denying this assertion, the court questioned whether the act even constituted a valid trust fund, citing a lack of defined trustee as a significant shortcoming.

Moreover, the court referenced a previous case, O’Brien, where a municipality attempted to sidestep constitutional restrictions by creating a trust fund. The court ruled similarly here, stating that the funds remained public and could not be diverted to benefit private schools.

The Broader Impact

Supporters of school choice have long argued that parents should have the freedom to select educational options that align with their child’s unique needs. Critics, however, worry that using public money for private schooling could siphon vital funds away from public education, leaving many traditional schools struggling.

In anticipation of this ruling, many senior legislators believed they had crafted a plan that would withstand legal scrutiny, especially after a similar approach taken by McMaster in 2020 was shot down over concerns regarding the misuse of federal COVID-19 aid.

Unfortunately for these lawmakers, their optimism did not bear out, as the court held firm that despite the altered structure of funding, public money was still being funneled into private schools. “After we clear away the window dressing, we can see the act funnels public funds to the direct benefit of private schools,” the court stated firmly.

Next Steps

In light of the ruling, Governor McMaster has expressed his intent to request a prompt reconsideration by the court, underscoring the potential “devastating consequences” for many low-income families. Meanwhile, Weaver has promised to work tirelessly alongside the governor and the General Assembly to seek solutions for families affected by this setback.

While the law may have been partially overturned, families are still able to use the scholarship money for public schools outside their designated districts. The debate over school choice in South Carolina is far from over, and many families are left waiting to see what the future holds for their educational options.