Is school choice constitutional?
If the program is well designed, it probably is! This question was answered resoundingly in 2002, when the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its decision upholding the constitutionality of Cleveland’s voucher program. By a 5-4 vote, the justices made it very clear that when an individual uses public funds to make a private choice in this case when a parent uses a voucher to send his or her child to a private school, including religious schools it does not violate the First Amendment. As Chief Justice William Rehnquist explained in the majority opinion, voucher programs such as Cleveland’s are “neutral in respect to religion (because they) provide assistance directly to a broad class of citizens, who, in turn, direct government aid to religious schools wholly as a result of their own genuine and independent private choice.” This landmark decision is in line with a long series of high-court decisions.
Yes. In 2002, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the landmark Cleveland voucher program. When an individual uses public funds to make a private choice – in this case when a parent uses a voucher to make an individual decision to send his or her child to a private school (including religious schools) – it is constitutional.
If the program is well designed, it probably is! This question was answered resoundingly in 2002, when the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its decision upholding the constitutionality of Cleveland’s voucher program. By a 5-4 vote, the justices made it very clear that when an individual uses public funds to make a private choice in this case when a parent uses a voucher to send his or her child to a private school, including religious schools it does not violate the First Amendment. As Chief Justice William Rehnquist explained in the majority opinion, voucher programs such as Cleveland’s are “neutral in respect to religion (because they) provide assistance directly to a broad class of citizens, who, in turn, direct government aid to religious schools wholly as a result of their own genuine and independent private choice.” This landmark decision is in line with a long series of high-court decisions. For example, in 1983 the court upheld Minnesota’s income tax deduction for educational exp
If the program is well-designed, it is likely! This question was answered resoundingly in 2002, when the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its decision upholding the constitutionality of Cleveland’s voucher program. By a 5-4 vote, the Justices made it very clear that when an individual uses public funds to make a private choice – in this case when a parent uses a voucher to make an individual decision to send his or her child to a private or religious school – it does not violate the First Amendment. As Chief Justice William Rehnquist explained in the majority opinion, voucher programs like Cleveland’s are “neutral in respect to religion [because they] provide assistance directly to a broad class of citizens, who, in turn, direct government aid to religious schools wholly as a result of their own genuine and independent private choice.” This landmark decision is in line with a long series of High Court decisions.
