Constitutional Right to School Choice?
8th Circuit Says No; Desegregation Specter Hovers Over School Choice
8th Circuit Says No; Desegregation Specter Hovers Over School Choice
Note from the Editor: The Federalist Society takes no positions on particular legal and public policy matters. Any expressions of opinion are those of the author. We welcome responses to the views presented here. To join the debate, please email us at info@fedsoc.org.
No one is a more fervent fan of school choice---or for that matter, of creative legal advocacy---than me. But the Eighth Circuit got it right last Monday when it ruled in Stevenson, III v. Blytheville School Dist. #5 (No. 14-3746) there is no federal constitutional right to choose among public schools.
Arkansas passed a statute creating inter-district school choice for public students---unless school districts exempt themselves because they are still under federal desegregation orders. The defendant school district exempted itself based on a desegregation case that was closed many years ago. Rather than challenge the dubious exemption in state court, the plaintiffs---parents who wanted to avail themselves of transfers---filed a federal lawsuit arguing their due process and equal protection rights were violated.
The Supreme Court consistently has held there is no federal constitutional right to education. Invoking the Pierce v. Society of Sisters line of cases, the plaintiffs gamely argued that their parental rights were violated. The appeals court ruled that Pierce simply allows parents to remove their kids from public schools and does not confer a right to choose among public schools. The court also rejected the equal protection claim because the program is race-neutral and the government's actions had a rational basis.
Perhaps in the future there will be a case in which school districts subject students to such deplorable conditions, or limit their mobility on such arbitrary grounds, that due process and equal protection are violated. But this was not such a case.
The Douglas County (CO) School District soon will petition the USSC for review of a CO Supreme Court ruling (Taxpayers for Public Education v. Douglas County School Dist., No. 2015 CO 50, June 29, 2015) striking down its voucher program under the state's Blaine Amendment, which forbids public funding of religious schools. Such discrimination against religious schools and families should be held to violate the First Amendment.
The bigger question left unanswered by the Stevenson decision is what are these desegregation decrees doing mucking up school choice? Hundreds of school desegregation orders, many of them moribund, continue to exist, mainly but not exclusively in the South. They have been invoked to impede movement of kids to charter schools and other educational options.
The Obama Administration dusted off a 40-year-old court order to subject Louisiana's voucher system to federal court jurisdiction, notwithstanding that the overwhelming majority of kids in the program are black. The perverse consequence is that a decree intended to secure educational opportunities for black children could be used to thwart them.
Citing among other cases the USSC's decision in Shelby County, which struck down section 4 of the Voting Rights Act, I argued this summer in the Fifth Circuit that a federal court may not extend its jurisdiction over a decades-old desegregation case to encompass a contemporary, race-neutral school choice program (Brumfield v. Dodd, No. 14-31010). A successful outcome could help remove the specter of desegregation decrees from efforts to expand educational opportunities to children who desperately need them.
School choice and public school reform remain fertile areas for legal trailblazing. Despite the outcome in the Eighth Circuit, we need to continue investing legal ingenuity to tackle the urgent needs of our nation's children.
Justice, Supreme Court of Arizona
Clint Bolick was appointed by Governor Doug Ducey in January 2016 to serve on the Arizona Supreme Court and was retained by the voters in 2018 and 2024.
Prior to joining the Court, Justice Bolick litigated constitutional cases in state and federal courts from coast to coast, including the U.S. Supreme Court. Among other positions, he served as Vice President for Litigation at the Goldwater Institute and as Co-founder and Vice President for Litigation at the Institute for Justice. He has litigated in support of school choice, freedom of enterprise, private property rights, freedom of speech, and federalism, and against racial classifications and government subsidies.
Justice Bolick received his Juris Doctor degree from the University of California at Davis, where he has been recognized as a distinguished alumnus, and his Bachelor of Arts degree magna cum laude from Drew University. He serves as a research fellow with the Hoover Institution. Among other honors, he was named one of the 90 Greatest DC Lawyers in the Last 30 Years by Legal Times in 2008, received a Bradley Prize in 2006, and was recognized as one of the nation’s three lawyers of the year by American Lawyer in 2002 for his successful defense of school vouchers in Zelman v. Simmons-Harris.
Justice Bolick is a prolific author of a dozen books and hundreds of articles. Among his most recent books are Unshackled: Freeing America’s K-12 Education System: Immigration Wars: Forging an American Solution, co-authored with former Florida Governor Jeb Bush; and David’s Hammer: The Case for an Activist Judiciary. Bolick serves as an adjunct professor of constitutional law at Arizona State University’s Sandra Day O’Connor School of Law and has served as a lecturer at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government.