“It is funded, is operational, it is available for Ohio parents,” Yost said. “And I want to urge all Ohio parents to carefully consider what’s in the best interest of your child.”
The voucher program, which provides financial assistance to eligible students to attend private schools, was ruled unconstitutional in mid-June, with Franklin County Judge Jaiza Page handing down the summary judgement.
However, Page immediately stayed the decision, “recognizing the state’s important policy setting interests here, and putting her ruling on pause while the appeals court process unfolds,” Yost said.
The lawsuit was originally filed by the Coalition for Adequacy & Equity of School Funding, or Ohio E&A, in 2022. About 300 districts, or nearly half of the districts in the state, have joined the lawsuit, challenging the constitutionality of EdChoice, Ohio’s voucher program that been around since the early 2000s.
Ohio E&A argued that the system for school funding in Ohio, where public and private schools are both funded by the state but under different formulas, is unconstitutional. Over 160,000 students using school vouchers, said Rabbi Eric “Yitz” Frank, President of School Choice Ohio.
Ohio lawmakers said Monday that they feel there is significant legal precedent for the constitutionality of Ohio’s EdChoice program, adding those reasons will be detailed in the appeal.
“I feel very confident over the course of this appeal that the legislature’s action will be found to be lawful, constitutional, and it will continue to operate in Ohio into the future,” Yost said.
In her nearly 50-page judgment, Page found vouchers to be unconstitutional because they create a separate and unequal system of private schools, which are not required to accept all students who apply, and the Ohio Constitution says lawmakers shall create a single system of common schools for the common good. Second, private school vouchers take money directly away from public schools. Third, the Ohio Constitution states “...no religious or other sect, or sects, shall ever have any exclusive right to, or control of, any part of the school funds of this state.”
House Speaker Matt Huffman claimed Monday that not only is it constitutional, the Ohio Constitution “requires the funding of religious education by the state.”
Huffman cited the part of the Ohio Constitution that states “...it shall be the duty of the general assembly to pass suitable laws to protect every religious denomination in the peaceable enjoyment of its own mode of public worship, and to encourage schools and the means of instruction.”
“In many places, we do not fund in any way the means of religious education,” Huffman said. “There’s no alternative in many parts of Ohio for religious education. But that’s not really what this case is about...this case, and cases like it, are intended to shape public policy.”
Critics of the EdChoice program say that Huffman’s assertion that the Ohio Constitution requires funding for religious education is “a fairy tale.”
“These public officials are not going to be able to fool the general public,” said Bill Phyllis, Executive Director of Ohio E&A. “The Constitution is on the side of the plaintiffs. Clearly Judge Page understood that.”
Several local school districts, including Dayton Public Schools, Springfield City Schools, Middletown City Schools, Centerville City Schools and Fairborn City Schools, have joined the suit. Columbus City Schools is the lead plaintiff.
“People ought to have the right to choose a private education. But they don’t have the right from me as a taxpayer, to use part of my tax money to fund somebody’s private choice,” Phyllis said.
About the Author
