Zelman v. Simmons-Harris

Zelman v. Simmons-Harris, Supreme Court, 2002

Facts of the Case

In response to the failing public school system in Cleveland, Ohio, the state established the Ohio Pilot Project Scholarship Program. This program provided vouchers to low-income parents, allowing them to send their children to participating private schools, including religious schools, or to other public schools in different districts. Doris Simmons-Harris, along with other Ohio taxpayers, challenged the program, arguing that it violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment by providing state funds to religious schools.

Constitutional Question

Does the Ohio Pilot Project Scholarship Program violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment by allowing state funds to be used for tuition at religious schools?

Arguments

For Simmons-Harris:

  • The program violates the Establishment Clause by directing government funds to religious institutions, thus promoting religion.
  • The majority of the participating private schools were religious, effectively advancing religious education with public money.
  • The government should not be involved in funding religious education, which compromises the separation of church and state.

For Zelman (Superintendent of Public Instruction of Ohio):

  • The program is neutral regarding religion and provides aid directly to parents, who independently choose where to use the vouchers.
  • The primary purpose of the program is to provide educational opportunities to children in a failing public school system, not to advance religion.
  • The program does not violate the Establishment Clause because any benefit to religious schools results from the independent decisions of parents.

The Decision

The Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, ruled in favor of Zelman. The majority opinion, written by Chief Justice William Rehnquist, held that the Ohio program did not violate the Establishment Clause. The Court emphasized that the program was neutral with respect to religion and provided benefits directly to a broad class of citizens who directed the aid to religious schools through their independent choices. The decision highlighted that the government aid reached religious institutions only as a result of the genuine and independent private choices of the parents.

Significance

Zelman v. Simmons-Harris is a significant case regarding the intersection of government funding and religious institutions. The ruling upheld the constitutionality of school voucher programs, provided they are religiously neutral and the aid reaches religious institutions through the independent decisions of private individuals. This decision has had a considerable impact on the debate over school choice and the use of public funds for private education, including religious schools. It affirmed the principle that government programs that provide aid directly to individuals, who then have a genuine choice in how to use that aid, do not necessarily violate the Establishment Clause.