The Supreme Court heard arguments Wednesday in a pivotal case over whether Oklahoma may establish the nation’s first taxpayer-funded religious charter school — a legal showdown with sweeping implications for the First Amendment’s religion clauses and the future of public education.
The proposed school, St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School, would offer K-12 instruction infused with Catholic doctrine and operated by the Archdiocese of Oklahoma City and the Diocese of Tulsa. Though never opened due to litigation, if approved, it would be the first religious charter school in the country.
Historically, charter schools take taxpayer money, are open to all students, and have free tuition.
The main distinction between charter schools and other public schools is that charter institutions are run by private organizations. In many states throughout the country, laws require charter schools to be nonsectarian.
The case has triggered fierce debate over the role of religion in publicly funded education and sharply divided Republican officials in Oklahoma. Gov. Kevin Stitt (R-OK) and the Trump administration support the school’s creation, while Republican state Attorney General Gentner Drummond argued it violates constitutional limits on government involvement in religion.
Kavanaugh wonders if Oklahoma attorney general is engaging in ‘rank discrimination’ against religion
The court’s conservative justices appeared open to the idea that excluding religious applicants from a state’s charter school program could amount to “rank discrimination,” as Justice Brett Kavanaugh put it.
Justice Kavanaugh is on fire today. Challenging OK to explain how denying religious schools from its all comers charter school program is anything other than “rank discrimination”. pic.twitter.com/Wh79oeHCMG
— Roger Severino (@RogerSeverino_) April 30, 2025
“Justice Gorsuch pointed out earlier, a state could easily design a different kind of charter school system where they really were government-run, government-controlled, government-created, government-established private charter schools,” said Kavanaugh, an appointee of President Donald Trump.
“That’s not what some states have. They open it up to private people to apply, and then when you say to someone, ‘You’re no good because you’re religious,’ they’re not asking for special treatment, they’re not asking for favoritism. They’re just saying, ‘Don’t treat us worse because we’re religious.’ That just seems like a core principle,” Kavanaugh added.
A red state with GOP leaders at odds with one another
Drummond, a Republican attorney general running for governor next year, has maintained that Oklahoma’s charter schools function as public schools and must remain secular. In a brief to the Supreme Court, he said allowing religious instruction in a state-funded charter school would run afoul of the establishment clause.
“I contend this proposal would have grave consequences for religious liberty,” Drummond posted to X just before oral arguments on Wednesday.
One of the most prominent recent cases cited in support of St. Isidore is the 2022 case Carson v. Makin, a landmark decision that determined the free exercise clause of the First Amendment did not comport with Maine’s “nonsectarian” requirement that barred the use of public vouchers to pay for tuition at religious-based private schools. Carson was one of the cases Stitt recently ordered Oklahoma agencies to ensure their laws and statutes adhere to throughout the state government.
In contrast to the attorney general, Oklahoma State Superintendent Ryan Walters, the state’s head of education, who has pushed to get religious materials such as Bibles into public school classrooms, has consistently endorsed St. Isidore.
He told the Washington Examiner he believed Kavanaugh delivered a “decisive argument” in favor of the Catholic charter school and that Kavanaugh “rightly emphasized that religious institutions are not asking for favoritism, but for fair and equal treatment.”
“We are optimistic that this case is headed toward a favorable outcome for St. Isidore and that the Constitution still protects the rights of religious Americans,” Walters said.
Oklahoma’s Supreme Court agreed in a 6–2 ruling last year that the charter would make St. Isidore a “governmental entity” acting as “a surrogate of the state.”
James Campbell, representing the Oklahoma Charter School Board for the firm Alliance Defending Freedom, countered that St. Isidore is a private initiative run by a religious nonprofit organization with complete control over its curriculum and leadership.
“Under this court’s test, St. Isidore is neither the government nor engaged in state action,” Campbell said.
Roberts is key to the final decision
Chief Justice John Roberts opened Wednesday’s arguments with pointed skepticism toward St. Isidore’s positions. But as the nearly two-hour session progressed, he appeared increasingly receptive to the school’s claims.
Roberts first struck a more cautious tone, noting that past religious liberty cases concerned more limited benefits, such as playground upgrades or school tuition reimbursement.
“This does strike me as a much more comprehensive involvement,” Roberts said.
However, in a key moment, Roberts drew a parallel to the Supreme Court’s 2021 decision that barred Philadelphia from excluding a religious organization from its foster care system.
“We held they couldn’t engage in that discrimination,” Roberts said. “How is that different from what we have here: an education program, and you want to not allow them to participate with a religious entity?”
Liberal justices lean on separation of church and state arguments
The court’s liberal bloc, led by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson, raised sharp concerns over whether religious charter schools could impose doctrinal restrictions on students or exclude certain teachings. They argued largely in unison that any public funding to the school would violate the Establishment Clause.
“We’re not going to pay religious leaders to teach their religion,” Sotomayor said bluntly.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett, a former Notre Dame Law School professor, recused herself without explanation. The school is represented in part by Notre Dame’s religious liberty clinic.
How will the justices decide?
In addition to Oklahoma’s top education official, St. Isidore gained support from the Trump administration during oral arguments. Solicitor General D. John Sauer advocated for the school in his first oral argument contribution since his Senate confirmation.
Sauer said that “independence and private choice” underscored the main intentions for the charter school’s formation, and the plaintiffs deserved application of the free exercise clause.
Based on the oral arguments Wednesday morning, at least three of the Democratic-appointed justices seemed inclined to undo the state Supreme Court’s decision last year.
However, with some boisterous skepticism from members of the high court, including Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, Kavanaugh, and Gorsuch, it might come down to whether Roberts is willing to form a 5-3 decision.
Carrie Severino, president of the conservative judicial activism group JCN, said the Supreme Court has “repeatedly” emphasized that states cannot exclude religious institutions from public benefits simply because they are religious.
“I expect the court will follow precedent and allow St. Isidore to offer educational choice for Oklahoma’s students,” Severino said.
OKLAHOMA ATTORNEY GENERAL BREAKS GOP RANKS IN CATHOLIC CHARTER SCHOOL LEGAL FIGHT
However, if the case deadlocks at 4-4, it could spell trouble for St. Isidore’s future in Oklahoma.
A decision in the case is expected by the end of June.
