Supreme Court deadlocks, blocking creation of first religious public school
Last edited Thu May 22, 2025, 11:34 AM - Edit history (1)
Source: Washington Post
Updated May 22, 2025 at 11:11 a.m. EDT
The Supreme Court deadlocked Thursday over the constitutionality of the nations first public religious charter school, blocking the creation of a controversial Catholic institution that would have reshaped American education and blurred the line between church and state. With only eight justices voting, the Supreme Courts 4-4 tie in the blockbuster case leaves in place an Oklahoma State Supreme Court ruling that St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School would violate state law and the Constitution.
A ruling for St. Isidore would have allowed, for the first time, direct and complete taxpayer funding to establish a faith-based charter school, legalizing government sponsorship of a curriculum that calls for students to adhere to Catholic beliefs and the churchs religious mission.
Instead, the current landscape of government funding for religious schools remains intact. Under previous court rulings, taxpayer money may be used for vouchers that fund religious schools, but public schools including charter schools may not include religious teachings.
The tie is a disappointment for advocates of religious liberty who have spent years laying the groundwork for increased government funding of religious options. It came as a relief to opponents who say religious public charters blatantly violate the separation of church and state and could threaten the rights of religious minorities and gay people.
Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/05/22/supreme-court-oklahoma-religious-charter-schools/
Link to OPINION (PDF) - https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24-394_9p6b.pdf
No paywall (gift)
Article updated.
Previous article -
The Supreme Court deadlocked Thursday over the constitutionality of the nation's first public religious charter school, blocking the creation of the controversial Catholic online academy in Oklahoma.
With only eight justices voting, the Supreme Court's 4-4 tie leaves in place an Oklahoma State Supreme Court ruling that the school violates the separation of church and state.
A ruling for St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School would have allowed, for the first time, direct and complete taxpayer funding to establish a faith-based school, sanctioning government sponsorship of a curriculum that calls for students to adhere to Catholic beliefs and the church's religious mission.
This is a developing story. It will be updated.
Original article -
The Supreme Court on Thursday deadlocked over the constitutionality of the nation's first public religious charter school, blocking the creation of the controversial Catholic online academy in Oklahoma.
With only eight justices voting, the Supreme Court's 4-4 tie leaves in place an Oklahoma State Supreme Court ruling that the school violates the Constitution's separation of church and state.
A ruling for St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School would have allowed, for the first time, direct and complete taxpayer funding to establish a faith-based school, sanctioning government sponsorship of a curriculum that calls for students to adhere to Catholic beliefs and the church's religious mission.
This is a developing story. It will be updated.

Fiendish Thingy
(19,312 posts)underpants
(190,742 posts)A key factor in the outcome was that conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who would have been the deciding vote, did not participate in the case. She did not explain why, but it is likely because of her ties with Notre Dame Law School. The law school's religious liberty clinic represents the charter school.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-sidesteps-major-ruling-religious-public-charter-schools-rcna204111
MarineCombatEngineer
(15,508 posts)Justice Barrett did the right thing?
It would seem that Been A Dick Donald's nominee isn't toeing the MAGAt line on certain issues near and dear to them.
Expect the usual call from the MAGAt's for her impeachment and removal from the SC.
Shipwack
(2,674 posts)Probably surprising Trump et al, too.
Shes definitely not the disaster I was thinking she would be. Though I still hold that she wasnt qualified for the job (lack of experience, etc).
calimary
(86,347 posts)Who thought shed ever be reasonable?
Anybody who disappoints the donald cant be all bad.
Jit423
(1,354 posts)Courage is sometimes contagious.
peggysue2
(11,859 posts)Barrett had the decency and ethical center to step back on this case. Thank God for that. A ruling for the Catholic School would be the beginning of the end for public education, something the MAGA/Heritage Foundation hates. There will no doubt be other cases but this ruling at least slows down the process.
Separation of Church and State is another pillar the arsonists are desperate to set afire.
The Founders bones are rattling!
underpants
(190,742 posts)Tennessee Hillbilly
(679 posts)It's scary that the vote was so close
SSJVegeta
(535 posts)She put her integrity and the constitution above all else.
cstanleytech
(27,608 posts)Now that's scary.
SSJVegeta
(535 posts)And yet, she is the reason this didn't happen. At the very least she's proven herself to have more of a backbone and loyalty to our Republic than any of them can fathom.
Mz Pip
(28,088 posts)Gifted article is still paywalled for me.
BumRushDaShow
(152,902 posts)I am about to add the opinion.
SCOTUSBlog has a live discussion feed - https://www.scotusblog.com/2025/05/announcement-of-opinions-for-thursday-may-22/
(some think Roberts did the 4th vote to kick the can)
MarineCombatEngineer
(15,508 posts)underpants
(190,742 posts)The court did not indicate how the justices voted and oral arguments are not always an accurate predictor. But when the court heard the case in late April, Chief Justice John Roberts, in particular, asked sharp questions of both sides and appeared to be leaving his options on a decision open.
https://www.cnn.com/2025/05/22/politics/supreme-court-st-isidore-oklahoma
Be Leave On
(191 posts)Saying the groups who wanted this pass wanted "religious liberty" is BS.
They wanted tax-payer funded of their own, particular religion.
Those in opposition were the actual fans of non-discriminatory religious liberty for all.