Law & Courts

Utah’s Broad Voucher Program Could Face Challenge

By Jessica L. Tonn — February 20, 2007 4 min read

Although the nation’s first universal statewide voucher program has now passed the Utah legislature and been signed into law by Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr., its legal future is anything but certain.

“We’re very, very concerned about the program, not just from an education policy standpoint, but from a legal standpoint,” said Judith E. Schaeffer, the associate legal director for the People for the American Way, a Washington-based liberal advocacy group that has challenged the constitutionality of voucher programs elsewhere.

Her group is one of several that are considering filing suit on the grounds that the new law violates a provision of the Utah Constitution barring aid to schools controlled by religious organizations.

But proponents of the program—which would offer tuition vouchers ranging from $500 to $3,000 per year, based on family income, to any student who wanted to attend a private school—contend that the new program will survive legal scrutiny and join a more limited voucher program in Utah that, so far, has not been challenged.

“We’re confident that [the program is] constitutional and confident that it will pass legal scrutiny,” said Elisa Clements Peterson, the executive director of the Salt Lake City-based Parents for Choice in Education, which plans to work with the Utah attorney general’s office to defend the program if a lawsuit is filed.

Ms. Peterson said that she expects litigation as “par for the course” for parties that traditionally oppose school vouchers, such as teachers’ unions, public school administrators’ organizations, and parent-teacher groups.

Open to All

The new program, signed into law Feb. 12 by Gov. Huntsman, a Republican, is to start at the beginning of the next school year. State analysts predict that Utah will pay out a total of $9.3 million to about 3,000 interested students in the first year. Students now attending private schools will not be eligible unless they are from low-income families that qualify for free or reduced-price lunches. (“Utah’s Broad Voucher Plan Would Break New Ground,” Feb. 14, 2007.)

The program represents a significant victory in the eyes of voucher advocates nationally. In other states, voucher programs have been aimed at specific student populations, such as those who have special needs, attend failing schools, or live in a particular city.

In Utah, students with disabilities have since 2005 been able to receive up to $5,700 each for private school tuition. In the 2005-06 school year, 138 students participated. That program has not been attacked in court, though voucher opponents have not ruled out such a move.

Though members from several interested parties told Education Week that a lawsuit was in the works, none would go on the record late last week.

However, the Utah Education Association’s government-relations specialist, Vik Arnold, was quoted in the Deseret Morning News, a Salt Lake City-based newspaper, earlier in the week as saying that the Utah Public Education Coalition, which includes the state’s teachers’ union, school boards’ association, society of superintendents, parent-teacher organization, and other groups, was “reviewing legal strategies and options.”

At issue, opponents say, is a provision in the state constitution, much like those in other states, that prohibits the state from making “any appropriations for the direct support of any school or educational institution controlled by any religious institution.”

If the state gives families money to use at private schools, it’s “unquestionable that some of those will be religious schools,” Ms. Schaeffer of People for the American Way said.

‘Neutral Program’

About 15,000 students are enrolled in approximately 100 private schools in the state, of which more than half are religious. Utah’s relatively small private school sector—enrolling just 3 percent of the school-age population, compared with 10 percent for the national K-12 population—is attributed to the fact that some 60 percent of its 2.5 million residents are members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which doesn’t operate any schools in the state.

Chip Mellor, the president and general counsel of the Institute for Justice, an Arlington, Va.-based legal firm that defends voucher programs in court, said that Utah’s new voucher plan is a “neutral program that neither favors nor disfavors religion,” since parents, not the state, choose which schools receive the money.

His organization successfully argued the U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld Cleveland’s state-enacted voucher program for low-income students. That 2002 decision found that the program did not violate the U.S. Constitution because it allows “individuals to exercise genuine choice among options public and private, secular and religious.”

Ms. Schaeffer said that while the new Utah program may pass federal muster, it violates the state constitution because religious schools would still end up receiving state funds.

“The state constitution says what it says for a reason,” she said.

In the absence of a legal challenge, at least for the time being, the Utah Office of Education plans to go ahead with the program, said Carol Lear, the agency’s director of school law and legislation. Under the law, the agency is required to have the program’s rules in place by May 15 so that it can begin in the 2007-08 school year.

A version of this article appeared in the February 21, 2007 edition of Education Week as Utah’s Broad Voucher Program Could Face Challenge


This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Student Well-Being Webinar
Measuring & Supporting Student Well-Being: A Researcher and District Leader Roundtable
Students’ social-emotional well-being matters. The positive and negative emotions students feel are essential characteristics of their psychology, indicators of their well-being, and mediators of their success in school and life. Supportive relationships with peers, school
Content provided by Panorama Education
This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
School & District Management Webinar
Making Digital Literacy a Priority: An Administrator’s Perspective
Join us as we delve into the efforts of our panelists and their initiatives to make digital skills a “must have” for their district. We’ll discuss with district leadership how they have kept digital literacy
Content provided by
This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
School & District Management Webinar
How Schools Can Implement Safe In-Person Learning
In order for in-person schooling to resume, it will be necessary to instill a sense of confidence that it is safe to return. BD is hosting a virtual panel discussing the benefits of asymptomatic screening
Content provided by BD

EdWeek Top School Jobs

Teacher Jobs
Search over ten thousand teaching jobs nationwide — elementary, middle, high school and more.
View Jobs
Principal Jobs
Find hundreds of jobs for principals, assistant principals, and other school leadership roles.
View Jobs
Administrator Jobs
Over a thousand district-level jobs: superintendents, directors, more.
View Jobs
Support Staff Jobs
Search thousands of jobs, from paraprofessionals to counselors and more.
View Jobs

Read Next

Law & Courts How a Cheerleader's Snapchat Profanity Could Shape the Limits of Students' Free Speech
Brandi Levy's social media post is the basis for a case before the U.S. Supreme Court on whether schools may punish off-campus speech.
9 min read
Image of Brandi Levy.
Brandi Levy, now an 18-year-old college freshman, was a cheerleader at Mahanoy Area High School in Pennsylvania when she made profane comments on Snapchat that are now at the center of a U.S. Supreme Court case on student speech rights.
Danna Singer/Provided by the American Civil Liberties Union
Law & Courts Student School Board Members Flex Their Civic Muscle in Supreme Court Free-Speech Case
Current and former student school board members add their growing voices to a potentially precedent-setting U.S. Supreme Court case.
7 min read
Image of the Supreme Court.
Law & Courts Justice Department Memo Could Stoke State-Federal Fights Over Transgender Students' Rights
Title IX prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in schools, a Justice Department memo says.
3 min read
Stephanie Marty demonstrates against a proposed ban on transgender girls and women from female sports leagues outside the South Dakota governor's mansion in Pierre, S.D. on March 11, 2021.
Stephanie Marty demonstrates against a proposed ban on allowing transgender girls and women to play in female sports leagues outside the South Dakota governor's mansion in Pierre, S.D.
Stephen Groves/AP
Law & Courts Diverse Array of Groups Back Student in Supreme Court Case on Off-Campus Speech
John and Mary Beth Tinker, central to the landmark speech case that bears their name, argue that even offensive speech merits protection.
5 min read
In this photo taken Tuesday, Aug. 27, 2013, Mary Beth Tinker, 61, shows an old photograph of her with her brother John Tinker to the Associated Press during an interview in Washington. Tinker was just 13 when she spoke out against the Vietnam War by wearing a black armband to her Iowa school in 1965. When the school suspended her, she took her free speech case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court and won. Her message: Students should take action on issues important to them. "It's better for our whole society when kids have a voice," she says.
In this 2013 photo, Mary Beth Tinker shows a 1968 Associated Press photograph of her with her brother John Tinker displaying the armbands they had worn in school to protest the Vietnam War. (The peace symbols were added after the school protest). The Tinkers have filed a brief in the U.S. Supreme Court supporting a Pennsylvania student who was disciplined for an offensive message on Snapchat.
Manuel Balce Ceneta/AP