A recent dispute in an Ohio voucher lawsuit sheds featherlight on key arguments: who benefits from the private school voucher program, whether it takes funds away from public schools, and whether resegregating schools matters.
Public school advocacy groups and state school districts are suing to eliminate the state’s private voucher program, arguing that the program unconstitutionally harms the public school system. requested a summary judgment dismissal of the case in Franklin County Court of Common Pleas. The motion for summary judgment argues that a trial is unnecessary, leaving it up to the judge to decide the case.
Advocates for parents who participate in the voucher program have countered that the program’s primary beneficiaries are private schools, saying the benefits go to students instead. They also argue that the program is “basically a scholarship program — not a school funding program.”
“If the plaintiff believes public schools need more money, they can lobby their legislators or file a lawsuit to determine the adequacy of the funds,” attorneys for voucher parents said.
Ohio Republicans, who hold a supermajority, support the voucher program and have been advocates for direct state funding and expansion of the program in Budget for 2023 to a near universal level of eligibility.
Advocates for parents who support vouchers have rejected the argument that public schools suffer from diversion of funds to private schools, saying that while the program receives funding solely from the state, “school districts receive revenue from multiple sources from state, local and federal governments.”
Voucher supporters opposing the lawsuit argue that while the Ohio Constitution requires a public school system, alternative forms of education are also permitted and requiring a public school does not prohibit other sources of education.
“As the parents pointed out in their opening letter, the fact that program beneficiaries spend their stipends at private schools does not create a ‘school system,’ any more than food stamp beneficiaries spending their benefits creates a grocery store system,” the lawyers wrote.
Opponents of the voucher program acknowledged that private schools are an educational option but shut down the discussion about grocery stores.
“The state has no constitutional obligation to safeguard public grocery store systems,” wrote attorneys for public school districts and anti-voucher groups.
The lawsuit argues that not only is supporting vouchers for private education in the state improper, it also takes funds away from public schools, violating the state’s constitutional obligation to fund a “coherent and efficient” public education system.
They also argue that there is no difference between private schools under the voucher program and public schools, except, of course, state oversight of funding and operations.
Public school advocates said in court documents that private schools are “exempt from regulations regarding transparency, financial accountability, student outcomes, teacher qualifications and anti-discrimination.”
“In short, the only significant difference between the state’s provision for public and private schools is that, in the case of private schools, taxpayer money is not subject to any strings attached,” court documents state.
Voucher supporters have countered opponents’ claims that the program essentially resegregates schools, creating an environment where vouchers disproportionately go to white students. Attorneys for the parents have called the racial discrimination arguments “baseless insinuations based solely on their documented mistreatment of minority students,” which does not meet the requirements to qualify as a legal argument, they said.
Even if the claim about an raise in exploit of the substance by white students in the last school year is true, lawyers said it is “constitutionally irrelevant.”
“Whether one demographic group of students is slightly overrepresented or another slightly underrepresented in a given year is a function of the private choices of families, not the program itself,” court documents stated.
Voucher expansion data collected by the Ohio Department of Education and Workforce showed that over the past three years, more than 60 percent of voucher program participants were white students.
Lawyers for public school districts and anti-voucher groups have said they are not seeking “racial balance,” as voucher supporters claim, but rather “ending state-sponsored discrimination.”
If the court does not issue a summary judgment, the hearing will be held in November.
