SC lawmakers vow to reinstate school voucher program shot down by state Supreme Court
Legislative leaders in South Carolina have decided not to challenge a state supreme court decision that invalidated parts of the state’s school voucher program.
South Carolina Senate President Thomas Alexander, R-Oconee, and House Speaker Murrell Smith, R-Sumter, said Wednesday they will not request a rehearing from the state Supreme Court on a case that ruled portions of the 2023 Education Scholarship Trust Fund Act violate the state constitution’s prohibition against using public funds for the “direct benefit” of private schools.
Alexander and Smith said their first priority during the next legislative session will be to modify and reinstate the program.
“Despite the major flaws in the court’s judgment, it is now the legislature’s responsibility to address the consequences of the Court’s opinion and correct the course,” the statement read.
“Our highest priority when the General Assembly reconvenes in January is to ensure that families have educational choice and that funding for other educational programs that have been relied upon by so many South Carolinians for decades are secured for the future,” the statement read.
The Eidson case was brought by a group of public school parents along with the South Carolina NAACP and the South Carolina Education Association. Defendants included Gov. Henry McMaster, Alexander, Smith, state Education Superintendent Ellen Weaver and State Treasurer Curtis Loftis.
Alexander and Smith said that while they adamantly disagree with the court’s decision, they believe seeking a rehearing will not alter the case’s outcome.
“Further delays caused by continuing this litigation will not help the students for whom the legislature intended to provide hope and opportunity,” the statement said.
The education scholarship law established an education scholarship trust fund that grants $6,000 vouchers to qualified families who pull their children out of local public schools and enroll them in private schools or public schools outside of their zoned districts.
To qualify, a student must have been enrolled in a South Carolina public school during the previous school year, and their family must meet certain income requirements.
When arguing that the law was constitutional, state officials said that while the funds originate as “public,” they become “private” after the monies are transferred by Loftis to a trust fund, where qualified families then own the funds. Those families are governed by rules that limit the use of the money “for direct payment” to educational institutions only, whether private or public.
The court rejected the state’s argument, saying it was skeptical, in the first place, of whether the act included a true trust fund because the law fails to identify a trustee — something required under state law before a trust is considered valid. Their ruling was based on the constitution’s section known as the “no-aid” clause.
“The Supreme Court has issued its decision, and though we firmly believe they unnecessarily employed inflammatory language to denigrate those who support parental choice and utilized an outcome-driven approach to interpreting the constitution, we must accept their ruling,” the statement read.
Because the school voucher law was only partially struck down, families are still permitted to use scholarship funds to send their children to another public school outside of their zoned district.
But “thousands of children” that used the voucher to attend a private school this school year may soon be displaced, according to the lawmakers’ statement.
