Arizona A+: State Supreme Court Flunks Voucher Subsidies for Religious and Other Private Schools

By Bathija, Sandhya | Church & State, May 2009 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

Arizona A+: State Supreme Court Flunks Voucher Subsidies for Religious and Other Private Schools

Bathija, Sandhya, Church & State

Phoenix attorney Don Peters has strong feelings about school vouchers.

"Some of us," Peters told The Arizona Republic, "just think it's wrong to tax people to pay for private or religious education. The public schools are struggling enough, and these programs would take money away from public schools and route it to private schools."

Fortunately for Peters, who argued the case against vouchers at the Arizona Supreme Court, the Arizona Constitution mandates that viewpoint as well.

On March 25, in a unanimous decision, the state high court ruled two Arizona voucher schemes unconstitutional--marking a huge church-state victory in the battle against taxpayer aid to religious schools.

The ruling also serves as a stinging defeat for pro-voucher forces, including the Alliance Defense Fund, the Institute for Justice and the Arizona Catholic Conference, which fought hard to establish the pair of programs.

These sectarian pressure groups brought forward two small voucher plans aimed at disabled kids and foster children, hoping to win the support of sympathetic legislators. They succeeded when the General Assembly authorized the Arizona Scholarship for Pupils with Disabilities Program and the Arizona Displaced Pupils Choice Grant Program in 2006.

Through these programs, the state allotted tuition funding for a small number of children to enroll in religious and other private schools. Many observers speculated these initial projects were just setting the stage for these groups to push a massive universal voucher plan in the future.

A coalition of parent, education and civil liberties organizations in Arizona, including the Arizona School Board Association, challenged the subsidies as violations of the Arizona Constitution's "no-aid" provision, which prohibits the "appropriation of public money ... in aid of any ... private or sectarian school."


The Arizona high court in Cain v. Home claimed that though the legislature's programs may be "well-intentioned," Arizona is "bound by [its] Constitution."

"No one doubts that the clause prohibits a direct appropriation of public funds to such recipients," Justice Michael Ryan wrote on behalf of the court. "These programs transfer state funds directly from the state treasury to private schools."

The decision is an important victory for church-state separationists who have argued that vouchers violate constitutional safeguards and hurt the public school system. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld an Ohio voucher scheme under the federal Constitution in 2002, but as Americans United argued in its friend-of-the-court brief in this case, the Arizona "no-aid" provision provides greater church-state protection.

Thirty-six other states in the country have similar "no-aid" provisions in their constitutions, and Americans United hopes the Arizona decision makes it clear that vouchers are constitutionally dubious.

With this ruling, the 37 legislatures that have introduced voucher bills so far this session may have to reconsider the validity of their proposed programs. Voucher bills were introduced in Colorado, Florida, Kentucky, Mississippi, Nevada, New York, Oklahoma, Vermont, Virginia and other states.

"This important decision reflects our best traditions," said Barry W. Lynn, Americans United executive director. "It upholds the right of taxpayers to support only the religious institutions of their choice. Public funds should be spent at public schools."

AU's brief cited the deep historical roots in America against tax support for religion or religious training. It also discussed the views of James Madison and Thomas Jefferson, quoting a U.S. Supreme Court decision that said, "[t]he concern of Madison and his supporters was quite clearly that religious liberty ultimately would be the victim if government could employ its taxing and spending powers to aid one religion over another or to aid religion in general.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Cite this article

Cited article

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

Arizona A+: State Supreme Court Flunks Voucher Subsidies for Religious and Other Private Schools


Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?