Lawmakers Should Consider Oklahoma Funding Model After South Carolina High Court Rejects ESAs

For David Warner, choosing a school for his son was a “very personal” decision, he said. The ability to choose where he could learn close to home in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, made him and his family feel valued, a stark contrast, David said, to his experience with assigned public schools.

But yesterday, the state Supreme Court ruled, in a lawsuit backed by teachers’ unions, to cancel scholarships for some 3,000 children from low- and middle-income families. “It’s like the light has gone out,” David told me, “and we’re worried we’re going to be left in the dark again.”

In 2023, South Carolina lawmakers enacted the Education Scholarship Trust Fund program, which offered children from households with incomes at or below 200% of the federal poverty level (about $60,000 for a family of four) the opportunity to use an education savings account. Participating families received accounts worth $6,000 to use for educational products and services such as tutoring, textbooks, private school tutoring, and more. Some 19 states in the U.S. offered similar account-type options for families.

The number of accounts now stands at 18. The local chapter of the National Education Association (NEA), a teachers union, filed a lawsuit against the accounts last October. The South Carolina Supreme Court ruled the program unconstitutional, saying the accounts are a “direct” benefit to private schools and violate the state constitution, even though the state awards the accounts to parents, not schools.

The move is devastating for families like the Warners, as their child’s account could be immediately closed. “In just a few weeks of being in this program, we’ve seen a completely different approach to education. We’ve had better communication between teachers and staff, more interaction with families, and they’ve valued our input in a way that public school never has,” David said.

He said the private school aligned with his family’s values ​​and was transparent about what was taught in class. “The curriculum and teaching were completely transparent, so we knew exactly what our kids were learning,” he said.

He fears having a “difficult conversation” with his son about returning to the school he was assigned to and has struggled to fit in with. “He just made new friends, and now he may have to leave them, all because of this decision,” David said. “This decision implies that low-income families are irresponsible and that the educational elite knows better than parents, but that’s not the case for us,” he said.

The Warners’ other son has special needs, and David has adjusted his work commitments to care for this child. “Just because a family has a low income doesn’t mean they can’t make the best, most responsible choices for their children’s education,” David said.

Thousands of stories like this are expected to reach state lawmakers this fall as they prepare for the upcoming legislative session. Policymakers can still help South Carolina families by considering other innovations in education choice, such as Oklahoma’s new Parental Choice Tax Credit. Through this state tax credit, parents can receive tax credits worth up to $7,500 toward private school tuition and other educational products and services. All K-12 students in Oklahoma are eligible to apply.

Lawmakers across the country continue to adopt new learning options for students, even in states that already offer private school scholarships, such as vouchers. Lawmakers in Wyoming and Louisiana approved education savings accounts this year, and Louisiana added these accounts in addition to the state’s existing voucher program. Families in Oklahoma can “stack” their tax credits with that state’s existing voucher options. South Carolina lawmakers should consider solutions like these as they look for ways to help families.

“We hope that ultimately South Carolina families will prevail so that we can continue to make the best decisions for our children,” David said. Unions have closed the doors to the state’s children for now, but lawmakers have many alternatives at their disposal to give families and students a bright future.