The Supreme Court will address some essential education issues during its next term, from transgender protections to school choice.
The conservative-leaning Supreme Court will consider, among other things, another push by President Biden on student loans and may add more cases to its agenda as Republican states’ efforts to bring more Christianity into classrooms face legal challenges.
Here are some of the issues before the court that could have far-reaching implications for education in the United States:
Biden’s income-based repayment plan
Biden’s fresh Saving on Valorable Education (SAVE) plan to cancel student debt is currently the subject of two lawsuits brought by various state Republican groups declaring the plan illegal.
The SAVE plan began last fall when the Biden administration increased the income covered by student loan payments from 150 percent above the federal poverty level to 225 percent. The rest of the plan was set to take effect this month. It included increasing student loan repayments from 10 percent of disposable income to 5 percent, as well as fresh rules on how long a person must pay off loans before they are forgiven.
“Millions of borrowers already benefit from participating in the SAVE plan, and I am thrilled that so many Americans are applying every day so they too can benefit from the most affordable student loan repayment plan in history,” Education Secretary Miguel Cardona said of the plan.
Several GOP-led states fought to prevent these changes in July.
“Once again, the President is attempting to single-handedly push through an extraordinarily costly and controversial policy that he was unable to get through Congress,” said a lawsuit led by Missouri.
Judges in both lawsuits ruled that the Biden administration could proceed with reducing monthly payments, but one judge said the president could not forgive loans under the SAVE plan.
Despite this partial victory for the Republicans, South Carolina, Texas and Alaska Urgent appeal to the Supreme Court to reverse the lower payments as well.
The petition has been submitted to Justice Neil Gorsuch, and a decision on the matter, or whether the Supreme Court will take up the case, could come at any time.
Transgender policies
The Supreme Court will consider at least two policies related to transgender students: whether they should be on the sports team that matches their gender identity, and whether parents should be informed when a student changes their name or pronouns at school.
West Virginia has appealed to the Supreme Court after an appeals court ruled that a transgender athlete in middle school could compete on the team that matches his gender identity.
“We will not allow swamp elites to impose their values on the citizens of West Virginia,” said the state’s Attorney General Patrick Morrisey.
Meanwhile, in Parents Protecting Our Children v. Eau Claire Area School District, a group of Wisconsin parents wants the Supreme Court to overturn lower courts’ decision to dismiss their lawsuit, arguing that state officials’ plan to not inform parents when their child has changed their name or pronouns is unconstitutional.
The issue has recently made national headlines, with California becoming the first state to establish by law that parents do not have to be notified when their child changes his or her name or pronouns unless they attempt to do so on the official school record.
There is now a separate lawsuit against the California law, with plaintiffs making the same arguments that are being raised in the Supreme Court.
“This is a deeply frivolous lawsuit that appears to be aimed at stoking the garbage fire formerly known as Twitter rather than bringing legitimate legal claims to the surface,” Izzy Gardon, a spokesperson for Gov. Gavin Newsom (D), previously told The Hill. “AB 1955 preserves the relationship between child and parent, California law ensures that minors cannot change their name or gender without parental consent, and parents continue to have guaranteed and full access to their students’ education records under federal law. We are confident the state will prevail quickly in this case.”
School choice
A school choice measure that has become popular across the country is making its way to the Michigan Supreme Court, where opponents say a constitutional amendment banning direct or indirect public financial support for private schools violates the 14th The change.
The measure blocks the push for educational savings accounts (ESAs), which allow parents to enroll their children in Private school or home schooling receive an annual scholarship from the government
“When non-aid clauses target parents, they cause significant harm to primary and secondary education. The court should consider whether such targeting is unlawful,” EdChoice and the Defense of Freedom Institute said in an amicus curiae brief to the court.
Democrats condemned the school choice measure as a withdrawal of public funds from schools. in an attempt to undermine them.
“As a classroom teacher and a mother, the biggest issue for me is the direct defunding of our public schools here,” Beth Lewis, director of Save Our Schools in Arizona, previously told The Hill.
“A second reason the ESA voucher is a problem is that there is no transparency or accountability, and that’s by design. So we have no idea how taxpayer dollars are being used, what kind of curriculum is being taught, whether standards are being met, whether teachers have fingerprints, background checks or credentials,” Lewis added.
Other cases – and possibly fresh
A group of parents is suing Attorney General Merrick Garland over a memorandum on school board meetings that they say was unfairly targeted at them.
The memorandum focused on a “troubling increase in harassment, intimidation and threats of violence” during the Covid-19 pandemic, but Republicans seized on it, saying it treated concerned parents like “domestic terrorists.”
The case, titled “Saline Parents v. Merrick B. Garland,” was dismissed by the lower courts.
“The alleged AG policy is not regulatory, prohibitive or mandatory because it does not impose rules, requirements or coercive measures on individuals,” said Federal Judge Dabney Friedrich. “None of the documents that plaintiffs claim establish the policy pose an imminent threat of future legal action against anyone, let alone plaintiffs.”
The court will also hear another case involving school admissions: Boston Parent Coalition for Academic Excellence Corp. v. School Committee for the City of Boston.
The plaintiff in this case argues that the fresh admissions plan for Boston’s three highly selective exam schools is unconstitutional during COVID-19.
The plan proposed eliminating the testing requirement to focus on socioeconomic inclusion and racial diversity, which the plaintiffs say is a race-based quota program.
The case came after the Supreme Court ruled in 2023 that universities would no longer be allowed to employ positive discrimination measures in the admissions process.
Although the case over how much religion is allowed in public schools is not yet before the courts, it could soon be on the agenda.
Louisiana has enact a law For example, the Ten Commandments are required to be displayed in classrooms, and in Oklahoma, schools are instructed to employ the Bible as a teaching tool in numerous classes.
“If it weren’t for this extreme shift to the right in the US Supreme Court, this would be a very uncomplicated question. Yes, [the laws] would be crushed […] but the current Supreme Court has not shown much reluctance to overturn previous precedent, and so anything is possible,” Kevin Welner, a professor at the School of Education at the University of Colorado Boulder, previously told The Hill.
