Good day, CharterFolk,
In lieu of our usual weekly roundup of charter school developments, I want to share the rationale behind CharterFolk’s support for an amicus brief in the ongoing Supreme Court case concerning religious charter schools.
This rationale has been made plain in the recent debate hosted by the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) on this very topic.
As I’ve highlighted in previous posts, I believe this debate is a particularly important data point that CharterFolk readers should be keyed into. If you haven’t watched it yet, I highly recommend doing so. It’s over an hour long, but it’s time well spent, as the discussion encapsulates many of the broader trends and concerns surrounding the case.
At the outset of the debate, audience polling revealed significant opposition to the idea of requiring states to allow religious entities to operate charter schools. Only 22% supported the proposition, while 52% opposed it. Notably, this was an AEI audience, which leans conservative. Even within this group, more than half opposed the concept from the start, and less than a quarter supported it. It’s telling that the proponents of the proposition began their argument by acknowledging that the idea of religious charter schools was, until recently, considered far outside mainstream thinking. These sentiments align with what I’ve encountered in my discussions on the topic – opposition to religious charter schools far outweighs support, and even many supporters recognize that their position is an extreme one.
Meanwhile, the final polling results of the debate showed only 15% in support and 80% in opposition. Through the course of the discussion, opposition to the concept of religious charter schools grew by half, while support for it dwindled by half. This mirrors a broader trend: the more people learn about the concept, the more they recognize its flaws and oppose it. In fact, by the end of the debate, more than five times as many people opposed the concept as supported it.
This is why I encourage you to watch the debate in its entirety to become better informed and to form your opinion based on a deeper understanding.
One particularly revealing moment occurred early in the debate when moderator Nat Malkus emphasized the importance of originalism and understanding the original intent behind the charter school movement. He cited statements from policymakers like Ember Reichgott Junge and Jeb Bush, highlighting that charter schools were always intended to be public, nonsectarian institutions. This assertion created a clearly awkward moment for the proponents of religious charter schools, and their response – that times have changed and laws evolve – was unconvincing, especially considering the emphasis many justices place on original intent.
Malkus referenced the National Charter School Founders Library as a resource documenting the history and intent of the charter school movement.
Recognizing the need to highlight this original intent in the current legal debate, CharterFolk supported policymakers from across the political spectrum who passed original charter school laws in filing an amicus brief representing the views of the movement’s founders. You can access the full brief here.
I will close by reporting how pleased I am to know that Ember Reichgott Junge, the legislator who passed the first charter school law, will be in the courtroom on Wednesday as the case is heard.
Her presence will underscore the critical point that the original intent behind charter schools – as envisioned by her and countless other policymakers – lies at the heart of the charter school movement’s argument in this monumentally important case and warrants deep consideration by the justices.