An Historical and Legal Analysis of United States Supreme Court Decisions Concerning the Use of Public Funds to Support Private Education Through Vouchers Programs, and Their Relevance to State Court Decisions in Four Regions of The United States
The purpose of this dissertation was to provide an analysis of state and federal judiciary decisions on the constitutionality of voucher programs in different regions of the United States. The research focused on the evolution of legislative enactments and case law that were affected by changing attitudes and legal interpretations of the First Amendment establishment and freedom of religion clauses to the United States Constitution and various state constitutions. The study focused on the constitutional challenges in order to determine how the fundamental requirements that church and state remain separate and that government remain “neutral” with respect to religion affected the judicial and legislative decision making processes concerning the use of public funds through vouchers to support private education. This research analyzed 45 United States Supreme Court decisions from 1879 to 2004 which concerned separation of church and state issues, especially those related to education. The research showed that the United States Supreme Court’s decisions have shifted on the question of separation of church and state. In recent years, the Court has upheld the use of funds in religious schools in a range of programs considered “neutral” towards religion. Specifically with regard to vouchers, the Court’s decision in Mueller v. Allen upheld the Minnesota law that provided education tax deductions for tuition, textbooks, incidental expenses and transportation for all parents, whether their children attended public or religious schools. In Witters v. Washington Department of Service for the Blind, the Court defended indirect support of religion saying, “Any aid provided ... ultimately flows to religious institutions only as a result of the genuinely independent and private choices of aid recipients.” The United States Supreme Court let stand a state ruling that upheld the constitutionality of voucher programs in Wisconsin in Jackson v. Benson in 1998, saying, “...there is still no national constitutional standard to judge such efforts, leaving the issue to be fought out at the state level as several legislatures grapple with similar proposals.” The use of educational vouchers and the rules that govern their use differ from state to state. Some state constitutions have amendments prohibiting the use of tax money for religious schools, so that vouchers in those states might be unconstitutional at the state level even if they were determined to be constitutional at the federal level Because there is no national standard, this dissertation analyzed state court challenges to voucher programs from 1946 to 2003. States included in the study could be placed into three categories: those permitting or supporting vouchers or tax credits (Wisconsin, Ohio and Arizona); those prohibiting vouchers or tax credits (Maine, Vermont and California), and those that have considered vouchers or tax credits, but have not reached a definitive conclusion (Florida and Louisiana). These state court decisions were grouped into four main regions of the United States (Northeast, Southern, Midwest and Western), to determine whether decisions concerning vouchers might differ from state to state as well as from region to region. In addition, letters were sent to attorneys general, commissioners of education and religious leaders in those states and their comments on voucher programs were incorporated into the research. Finally, 31 guidelines were generated from court decisions, legislative actions and comments by attorneys, education officials and religious leaders concerning what is and what is not legal nationally as well as in the eight states included in this dissertation concerning the use of public funds to support private education. The intent was to provide state officials with guidelines that may assist legislators, attorneys, school officials, parents and religious leaders in determining what is, and is not allowable in their states when considering voucher programs.
United States of America, Supreme Court, School voucher, Public funding
Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations