Opinion ID: 1441344
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: School Aid Programs in Other States

Text: [¶ 51] In recognition of the changes in the Supreme Court's Establishment Clause jurisprudence, several states have enacted statutes aimed at providing financial assistance to parents of students attending religiously affiliated schools. For example, in 1995, the Ohio Legislature enacted a statute that provided need-based scholarships to students in Cleveland that may be used in public or private schools. See Simmons-Harris v. Goff, Nos. 96APE08-982, 96APE08-991, 1997 WL 217583 (Ohio Ct.App., May 1, 1997). [24] The Pilot Scholarship Program was enacted in response to an educational crisis in the Cleveland City School District so severe that the State was ordered by a federal court to take over administration of the district. See id. at . The scholarship program was drafted so that the money does not flow directly from the State to religiously affiliated schools. Where a scholarship recipient chooses a public school, the State issues a check payable directly to the school. Where the scholarship recipient has chosen a private school, however, the State delivers a check, made payable to the parents, who must endorse the check to the school. See id. Although the Ohio trial court upheld the program in the face of a constitutional challenge, an intermediate appellate court struck down the program [b]ecause the scholarship program provide[d] direct and substantial, nonneutral government aid to sectarian schools, and had the primary effect of advancing religion in violation of the Establishment Clause. See id. at . An appeal of that decision is pending before the Ohio Supreme Court. [¶ 52] In 1998, the Wisconsin Supreme Court upheld a statute permitting sectarian schools to participate in the Milwaukee parental school choice program. See Jackson v. Benson, 218 Wis.2d 835, 578 N.W.2d 602, cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 119 S.Ct. 466, 142 L.Ed.2d 419 (1998). The program, enacted to enable economically disadvantaged children in Milwaukee to attend private schools, authorized the State to issue tuition vouchers to approved private schools, both sectarian and nonsectarian, in the name of parents of students attending the school. [25] See id. at 608-09. In order for the school to obtain state funding, the voucher must then be endorsed to the school by the parent whose name appears on the voucher. See id. at 608-09. [26] The Supreme Court declined a petition for certiorari in this matter. [27] [¶ 53] Very recently, the Arizona Supreme Court upheld a state tax credit, of up to $500, equal to the amount individuals donate to school tuition organizations. [28] See Kotterman v. Killian, 193 Ariz. 273, 972 P.2d 606 (1999). The Court upheld the statute against a claim of an Establishment Clause violation, holding that [p]rivate and sectarian schools are at best only incidental beneficiaries of this tax credit, a neutral result that we believe is attenuated enough to satisfy Mueller and the most recent Establishment Clause decisions. Id. at 616 (citations omitted). [¶ 54] Although the recent efforts of Arizona, Ohio, Vermont, and Wisconsin provide a backdrop for our analysis, they do not provide persuasive authority for interpretation of the Establishment Clause. The Supreme Court has not yet reviewed any of these programs, and it is not clear which of them, if any, would be found to pass muster under an Establishment Clause analysis. Moreover, although the efforts of other states demonstrate that the Supreme Court's changing attitude in Establishment Clause jurisprudence has encouraged other state legislatures to create new programs offering financial assistance to parents of students attending religiously affiliated schools, none speaks to the issue before us today.