Oklahoma’s Ban on Catholic Charter School Stands as Court Split Leaves Lower Ruling Intact
WASHINGTON, D.C. — MAY 23, 2025 – The U.S. Supreme Court issued a rare evenly split 4–4 decision Thursday in a high-stakes case involving religion, education, and taxpayer funding, effectively upholding a lower court’s ruling that blocks Oklahoma from establishing the nation’s first religious charter school.
The deadlock occurred after Justice Amy Coney Barrett recused herself, leaving the Court divided and without a decisive majority. In a one-sentence ruling, the justices wrote:
“The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court.”
This means the lower court’s decision—which barred Oklahoma from launching a state-funded Catholic virtual charter school—remains in effect, dealing a major blow to school choice advocates and setting up potential future challenges.
The Case: St. Isadore of Seville Catholic Virtual School
At the heart of the case was St. Isadore of Seville Catholic Virtual School, a proposed online religious charter school that would have operated as a public institution but offered explicitly Catholic instruction.
Supporters argued it would expand school choice and religious freedom. Opponents said it would violate the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause by forcing taxpayers to fund religious education.
Support:
-
Solicitor General John Sauer argued that Oklahoma’s refusal to allow a religious charter school amounted to religious discrimination, and that charter schools—while publicly funded—should not be barred from expressing religious values.
-
Justice Brett Kavanaugh, during oral arguments, called Oklahoma’s position “rank discrimination against religion.”
Opposition:
-
Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond, a Republican, opposed the Catholic school, arguing it would violate both state and federal constitutional protections and open the door to government interference in religion.
-
“This is not about promoting faith—it’s about protecting religious liberty from entanglement with the state,” Drummond said.
Barrett’s Recusal: The Game-Changer
Justice Barrett’s recusal was not explained, but legal analysts speculate it could stem from personal or professional ties to individuals or organizations involved in the case. Her absence ultimately allowed the court to split 4–4, a procedural outcome that automatically affirms the lower court ruling without setting precedent.
Without her vote, the Supreme Court could not issue a definitive ruling—meaning the legal landscape remains murky and fragmented, with different states now likely to test similar boundaries.
What This Means Going Forward
-
Oklahoma’s charter school program remains barred from including religious institutions for now.
-
The ruling does not establish national precedent, meaning future cases from other states could force the Court to revisit the issue—especially with a full bench.
-
Religious liberty and education advocates are expected to re-file or escalate similar lawsuits in other jurisdictions to create a clearer pathway to a majority decision.
Summary
-
Case Outcome: 4–4 split upholds block on Catholic charter school
-
Key Issue: Can taxpayer funds be used for religious charter schools?
-
Impact: Lower court ruling stands, but no national precedent set
-
Recusal: Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s absence proved pivotal
Bottom Line: The Court punted on a critical constitutional question, but the fight over religious charter schools is far from over. With no clear resolution, both sides are now preparing for the next round—and possibly, a more definitive ruling in a future term.
