Fighting for Parental Rights: The ACLJ’s Commitment to School Choice

The ACLJ is proud to support and defend school choice across the country. At the ACLJ, we support efforts in every state to allow parents to choose the school they believe will provide their kids the best education – whether it’s a private, religious, charter, homeschool, or public school – regardless of economic or social standing.

What Is School Choice?

Education, at its core, is a state issue. States are not required to operate voucher programs or school choice programs. School choice is a crucial opportunity for states to support parents and enable them to carry out their educational goals. It can be defined as enabling options in education through state financial support of programs like vouchers or transportation assistance. As we have explained in the past: “School Choice is essentially a way the government can allow educational tax dollars to be used to enable parents to choose whatever education option they feel is best for their kids.”

School choice initiatives occur in a variety of ways, including School Vouchers, Educational Savings Accounts, Charter and Magnet Schools, Tax-Credit Scholarships, and Tax Credits and Deductions. These options make it possible for parents to send their children to the school best suited to their educational needs.

Why Does the ACLJ Support School Choice?

The ACLJ firmly believes that parents should be able to choose the educational environment that best serves their children’s needs. For decades, the ACLJ has advocated for educational freedom across America. We’ve witnessed firsthand how school choice initiatives empower families, especially those in underserved communities, by providing access to quality education options beyond their assigned district schools.

School choice can depend on very specific state laws that can be different, depending on the situation. For school choice to be enabled, states need to be at the forefront of fighting for legal changes to protect families and developing robust systems to enable parental options. The ACLJ is honored to stand in defense of parents seeking to exercise their rights, which are protected and created by these state laws, and to support efforts to pursue further creative solutions.

School choice creates healthy competition that improves the quality of education across all schools. This accountability mechanism creates powerful incentives for schools – public, private, and charter – to provide excellent education. School choice is a win-win. Parents select the program that best suits their educational plan for their children. And society enjoys greater freedom and diversity, rather than having all children forced into a one-size-fits-all program dictated by the government educational authorities.

Many of America’s public schools are failing our children. Despite increased funding, academic performance continues to decline in many districts. Meanwhile, families remain trapped in underperforming schools simply because of their ZIP code or financial limitations. School choice breaks this monopoly. At its core, school choice acknowledges a fundamental truth: Parents, not government officials, know what’s best for their children. When families have options beyond their assigned district school, they can choose educational environments that reinforce their deeply held religious beliefs, moral values, and educational priorities.

School Choice at the National Level

Parents have rights at the federal level, but those rights do not require school choice. The Supreme Court has held that prohibiting private education altogether is inconsistent with the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment. Pierce v. Soc’y of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510, 529 (1925) held that a law prohibiting private education violated the “parental right to guide one’s child intellectually and religiously,” infringing upon “a most substantial part of the liberty and freedom of the parent.” Id. At the same time, the Supreme Court has also made clear that states have the authority to set educational standards and are not required to adopt a specific form of school choice: Pierce “held simply that while a State may posit [educational] standards, it may not preempt the educational process by requiring children to attend public schools.” Runyon v. McCrary, 427 U.S. 160, 177 (1976).

In other words, constitutional parental rights exist. But those parental rights do not provide a specific right to school choice. No one has a right to a specific voucher program or some other financial state aid program. In fact, states are not required to operate voucher programs or school choice programs.

The first modern voucher program was established in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, in 1990, providing low-income families with public funds to attend private schools. This pioneering program faced immediate legal challenges from those determined to maintain government control over education. The constitutionality of including religious schools in voucher programs came to a head in the landmark 2002 Supreme Court case Zelman v. Simmons-Harris, in whichthe ACLJ filed a crucial amicus brief. The Supreme Court upheld the existence of a state voucher program, confirming that properly designed voucher programs that give parents genuine choice among religious and non-religious options do not violate the Establishment Clause.

It is also crucial to know that when they create voucher programs, the Supreme Court has held that the states cannot discriminate against religious schools. Recent Supreme Court decisions have prohibited any religious discrimination in the distribution of government benefits. We continue to fight against state “Blaine Amendments” and other discriminatory provisions that attempt to exclude faith-based organizations from generally available programs.

President Trump has issued a critical Executive order (EO) supporting school choice. The President’s EO emphasized that the public education system has been failing many students, and school choice programs “have highlighted the most promising avenue for education reform: educational choice for families and competition for residentially assigned, government-run public schools.” The President’s EO has required the Secretary of Education to “include education freedom as a priority in discretionary grant programs.” The ACLJ supports these efforts to expand educational freedom through federal programs and resources.

School Choice at the State Level

But for the most part, school choice itself and the options made available to parents for things like vouchers, transportation, and other specific programs are questions of state law that are set and defined by those communities. As concerned citizens, we must advocate for expanded educational options in our communities. The ACLJ supports legislative efforts in states to create such programs and refine school choice legislation.

Each state has laws defining school choice and setting the terms of what school choice might look like in that state. The ACLJ currently has two major cases holding school districts accountable for failing to follow the requirements of their state law. Rights to school choice are not automatic, but when they exist, it is crucial to hold schools accountable for their failure to comply with their obligations under state law.

In Ohio, we have a major lawsuit at the Ohio Supreme Court on behalf of a parent who was denied transportation assistance to which the parent was entitled. The Columbus City Board of Education is attacking that right by refusing to transport children to private schools, including many Christian schools, despite an Ohio law that expressly requires them to provide that transportation. Moreover, under Ohio law, the Board of Education is required to provide interim transportation while any transportation disputes are under review. Instead of following the law, the board refused. We’re asking the court to order the board to fulfill its mandatory transportation duties. The case is fully briefed and awaiting the Ohio Supreme Court’s decision.

In New Jersey, we have a new case before the New Jersey Commissioner of Education on behalf of a Christian family who has been denied the transportation aid that all students are entitled to under state law. Our client’s daughter attends a Christian school, and New Jersey law requires districts to provide transportation aid for students attending schools within 20 miles of their residence, including Christian schools. Despite our client providing multiple pieces of evidence showing the distance of 19.7 miles is clearly within the 20-mile limit imposed by law, the district stubbornly refuses to provide the legally mandated assistance. We will be entering discovery in this case soon, urging for a decision to be made for this family.

The ACLJ is honored to stand in defense of parents seeking to exercise their rights, which are protected and created by state laws. Teachers unions and educational bureaucrats often oppose school choice because it threatens their monopoly control over education funding and policy. We must remain vigilant against these efforts to preserve a status quo that fails too many children. By championing school choice and education, both through pursuing new creative options and holding schools accountable for failing to comply with their current obligations, we honor parents’ authority and responsibility to guide their children’s education and upbringing.