IBJNews

Judge denies request to block state voucher program

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A judge Monday declined to halt Indiana's broad new school voucher program, saying the law was "religion-neutral" and likely to be upheld.

The measure passed this year by the Republican-dominated General Assembly and signed into law by GOP Gov. Mitch Daniels is the nation's broadest private school voucher program. A group of teachers and religious leaders backed by the Indiana State Teachers Association is challenging it, claiming it violates the state constitution by providing public money to religious institutions.

However, in his ruling denying a temporary injunction, Marion Superior Court Judge Michael Keele wrote the law "is religion-neutral and was enacted 'for the benefit' of students, not religious institutions or activities."

"It permits taxpayer funds to be paid to religious schools only upon the private individual choices of parents," Keele wrote in siding with the state.

Attorneys for the state argued that a temporary injunction could have forced students who received vouchers to leave their private schools just as the academic year was beginning and to scramble to re-enroll in public schools.

They also contented the voucher system is legal because the state isn't directly funding parochial schools directly. Instead, it gives scholarship vouchers to parents, who can choose which school to use them at.

"I am thrilled with the court's ruling, which will ensure that I and other parents all over Indiana will have true educational choice this school year," said parent Heather Coffy, whose three children all received vouchers to attend Roman Catholic schools.

Coffy was one of two Indianapolis women who were allowed to join the case. They are represented by the Institute for Justice, an Arlington, Va.-based school choice advocate.

The law allows even middle-class parents to use taxpayer money to send their children to private secular and religious schools. About 2,800 Indiana students have been approved for the state-funded scholarships, and Attorney General Greg Zoeller said more than 150 of them used the vouchers to enroll in private schools that started last week.

In declining to halt the law, Keele wrote that the Indiana Supreme Court has long understood it's up to the General Assembly — not the courts, taxpayers or school corporations — to decide how Indiana children should be educated. In a ruling two years ago, the state's highest court also said education policy was a political question off limits to judicial intervention.

Keele ruled only on the plaintiffs' request for a preliminary injunction. Their complaint challenging the law hasn't gone to trial yet.

Indiana State Teachers Association President Nate Schnellenberger said the union will take a few days to evaluate Keele's decision.

"Obviously, we're disappointed in the judge's ruling. We think the case has merits," Schnellenberger said.

Indiana Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Bennett, named as a defendant in the case, said the ruling was "in the best interest of Indiana children."

One of the plaintiff's attorneys, John West, argued before Keele last week that vouchers helped religious schools recruit new students — and potentially new members — they otherwise wouldn't have reached.

A message was left at West's Washington, D.C., law office seeking comment on the ruling.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Tom
    How to put this gently, Tom... You're wrong. You can apply whatever vocabulary you like to it but at the end of the day, it's the transfer of taxpayer funds to a private religious institution. Now, if you're ready for private religious institutions to eliminate their tax exempt status, we can talk...
  • No irony in private schools
    Dear me...you are right. I personally think school choice is fine if every school is evaluated the same way, and is open to all students, as public schools are. And the reason the irony is lost on people like Heather is because there is no irony in religion, because they are sure they are right about every thing...they don't understand irony..it's in the same chapter as evolution...I love the word "twitchy" too. Great comments from me!...I can't do any better, so I will leave it at that..
  • What part of
    SCHOLARSHIP don't you understand? This is the same money that would have been spent anyway if the children had gone to public school. I believe this is the way it should have been done all along; the state allocates X dollars per child, and sends that amount to whichever school has the child enrolled.
  • (And
    it never fails to amuse me when religious people get all twitchy about their right to a "true choice." The irony is completely lost on them....)
  • Excuse me?
    Hey, Heather, why am I paying for your kids to attend a private religious school? You get a "choice" in the matter, so why don't I?

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. How much you wanna bet, that 70% of the jobs created there (after construction) are minimum wage? And Harvey is correct, the vast majority of residents in this project will drive to their jobs, and to think otherwise, is like Harvey says, a pipe dream. Someone working at a restaurant or retail store will not be able to afford living there. What ever happened to people who wanted to build buildings, paying for it themselves? Not a fan of these tax deals.

  2. Uh, no GeorgeP. The project is supposed to bring on 1,000 jobs and those people along with the people that will be living in the new residential will be driving to their jobs. The walkable stuff is a pipe dream. Besides, walkable is defined as having all daily necessities within 1/2 mile. That's not the case here. Never will be.

  3. Brad is on to something there. The merger of the Formula E and IndyCar Series would give IndyCar access to International markets and Formula E access the Indianapolis 500, not to mention some other events in the USA. Maybe after 2016 but before the new Dallara is rolled out for 2018. This give IndyCar two more seasons to run the DW12 and Formula E to get charged up, pun intended. Then shock the racing world, pun intended, but making the 101st Indianapolis 500 a stellar, groundbreaking event: The first all-electric Indy 500, and use that platform to promote the future of the sport.

  4. No, HarveyF, the exact opposite. Greater density and closeness to retail and everyday necessities reduces traffic. When one has to drive miles for necessities, all those cars are on the roads for many miles. When reasonable density is built, low rise in this case, in the middle of a thriving retail area, one has to drive far less, actually reducing the number of cars on the road.

  5. The Indy Star announced today the appointment of a new Beverage Reporter! So instead of insightful reports on Indy pro sports and Indiana college teams, you now get to read stories about the 432nd new brewery open or some obscure Hoosier winery winning a county fair blue ribbon. Yep, that's the coverage we Star readers crave. Not.

ADVERTISEMENT