The Supreme Court has left in place an Oklahoma Supreme Court decision rejecting efforts by a Catholic virtual charter school to become the first religious charter school in the nation. The decision comes as a result of a 4-4 split among the justices, with Justice Amy Coney Barrett recusing herself from the case. As a consequence, the state court’s decision remains binding only within Oklahoma and does not set a precedent for other states. The Supreme Court’s order did not disclose any details on how the other justices voted.
Justice Barrett’s decision to recuse herself is likely due to her connections with the case, including her previous teaching role at Notre Dame Law School, where the school’s religious liberty clinic represented St. Isidore of Seville. Nicole Stelle Garnett, a law professor at Notre Dame and a prominent advocate for religious school funding, shares a close personal connection with Barrett, who serves as the godmother to one of Garnett’s children.
The case originated in 2023 when Oklahoma’s charter school board approved the creation of St. Isidore of Seville, a Catholic virtual charter school. The school, proposed by the archdiocese of Oklahoma City and the diocese of Tulsa, was intended to engage in religious activities openly. Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond challenged the charter school board’s decision, leading to the state supreme court ruling. The court concluded that as a public institution, St. Isidore must remain non-sectarian, aligning with constitutional provisions against using public funds for religious organizations.
The ruling continues despite previous Supreme Court decisions that favored religious entities. In similar past cases, the Court determined that states like Missouri, Montana, and Maine could not bar religious groups from certain state benefits. However, in the case of St. Isidore, Chief Justice John Roberts noted that state involvement in operating a religious charter school could be “a much more comprehensive involvement” compared to previous cases.
During oral arguments, Justices expressed concerns about the potential consequences of their ruling. Justice Elena Kagan highlighted the risk that a decision supporting the charter school board could compel states to approve religious schools with curricula that diverge significantly from public institutions. Conversely, Justice Brett Kavanaugh worried that supporting the Oklahoma State Court’s decision might classify other religious services as government entities, thus inhibiting their religious activities.