Chalkbeat

Second NYC student detained by ICE, Education Department confirms

2025-06-07T00:28:40+00:00

Another New York City public school student has been detained by immigration agents, the Education Department confirmed late Friday.

The student, whose name and school have not been released, attended a legal hearing to seek asylum and was arrested by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, the department said.

“This young person should be returning home from school today, surrounded by family — not facing detention,” schools Chancellor Melissa Aviles-Ramos said in a statement, adding that she was “deeply saddened” by the arrest.

State Sen. Mike Gianaris said Friday that the student was an 11th grader from Grover Cleveland High School in Queens, Fox 5 reported. The Education Department didn’t confirm those details.

This is the second known case of a public school student detained by immigration authorities during President Donald Trump’s second term. The first student, Dylan Lopez Contreras, 20, was arrested by ICE two weeks ago after a routine court hearing in Manhattan and has not been released. Dylan’s arrest has prompted an outcry from local officials, who have called for his release, and his Bronx school, ELLIS Prep, has rallied around him.

As the Trump administration has ramped up its efforts to deport immigrants, other students have also been detained by ICE, including one in Massachusetts and another in Detroit. The student in Massachusetts has since been released. Federal officials did not confirm Friday where the Detroit student is being held.

In New York City, Aviles-Ramos urged families to continue sending their children to school “where they belong.”

“Our commitment to all students, including our newest New Yorkers, remains unwavering,” Aviles-Ramos said. “Our policies have not changed: schools are and will continue to be safe, welcoming spaces for every child.”

A spokesperson for Mayor Eric Adams said that City Hall was gathering more information about the incident.

“As Mayor Adams has said repeatedly, our city is less safe when people are afraid to use public resources — including going to their court hearings — and thus feel forced to hide in the shadows," the spokesperson said in a statement.

The city’s Law Department recently filed a friend-of-the-court brief in support of Dylan’s release, claiming his arrest was a “trap” that undermined faith in the court system, threatening “to deter people from accessing the court system on which local governance depends.”

The legal brief marked one of the most direct rebukes from the Adams administration of Trump’s immigration policy.

New York Bureau Chief Amy Zimmer contributed.

Cara Fitzpatrick is a story editor at Chalkbeat. Contact Cara at cfitzpatrick@chalkbeat.org.

Many states are moving toward private school choice. Illinois is letting its program lapse.

2023-11-14T19:35:49+00:00

A little over three years ago, Eva Villalobos was searching for a public school for her four daughters, two of whom she had recently adopted in March 2020.

She wanted a school that would provide the mental health and academic support her new daughters needed. Then she discovered St. Gall School on the city’s Southwest side. It had everything she was looking for: small class sizes, before- and after-school child care, and social emotional support.

The price tag for the Catholic school was steep — Villalobos said it cost her almost $20,000 a year for all four children. But her oldest daughter received funding from Illinois’ tax-credit scholarship, Invest in Kids, to bring the price down to about $10,000 a year.

Next school year, however, Villalobos’ children — and more than 9,000 other Illinois students who received tuition support this year through Invest in Kids — will no longer benefit from the state-sponsored financial help.

That’s because Illinois lawmakers are letting the tax-credit scholarship program lapse on Dec. 31. Students who already receive the tax credit scholarship will have their tuition paid for through the end of this school year.

Illinois’ move comes at a time when more than a dozen states across the country have created new private school choice programs or expanded existing ones.

Neighboring red states, such as Iowa and Indiana, have recently made nearly all of their students eligible for private school choice programs, which give families public dollars to pay for private educational options. Wisconsin, which has a Democratic governor and a Republican-dominated legislature, increased the dollar amount of its school vouchers over the summer.

But in Illinois, state lawmakers did not pass a bill during the fall veto session to extend the program despite a last-minute push from families and advocacy groups. Democratic Gov. J.B. Pritzker struck a neutral position that frustrated both sides — underscoring the shifting political winds in a state that has become more blue since the program passed six years ago.

Invest in Kids allows individuals or corporations to donate to scholarship-granting organizations that then distribute money to students from low-income families who need help paying tuition for private schools. Donors get a tax credit worth 75 cents for every dollar donated, up to $1 million. The state capped donations at $100 million and credits at $75 million — limits that were never hit, according to state data.

Michael Petrilli, president of the right-leaning Fordham Institute, said Illinois is likely the first state to kill an existing private school choice program without court intervention.

“It’s very hard to take government benefits away from people, especially when they are sympathetic individuals, especially low-income parents trying to do right by their kids,” Petrilli noted.

But opponents of private school choice programs applauded Illinois lawmakers for not extending the program when the veto session closed last Thursday evening.

Dan Montgomery, president of the Illinois Federation of Teachers, one of the state’s largest teachers unions, said in a press release that “there is a nationwide push to divert public dollars from our public schools through vouchers or voucher-like programs like tax credit scholarships and education savings accounts.”

He praised Illinois lawmakers who “chose to put our public schools first.”

For Villalobos, the end of the program likely means taking her children out of a school where they are thriving.

“We would be forced to try to find different ways to still be able to support them because they need all this additional help,” she said, noting that she doesn’t see how paying for private school would be feasible. “It just won’t happen.”

How politics shifted during Invest in Kids’ existence

Last week, Villalobos and other families and supporters of Invest in Kids filled the halls of the state capitol in Springfield for the final days of the fall veto session. Wearing blue shirts that read “Save My Scholarship,” they pushed state lawmakers to call a bill, HB 4149, that would extend the program until 2029 with some new limitations around donations.

But Illinois Speaker of the House Emanuel “Chris” Welch never called the bill for a vote.

The moment stood in stark contrast to 2017, when Republicans and Democrats were engaged in a tense, drawn-out battle over how to pay for public education. A budget impasse had stretched for two years.

At the time, Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner favored the idea of tax-credit scholarships and said he was “hopeful” a compromise deal would include such a program. Democratic leaders — all of whom are no longer in office — wanted a compromise to end the stalemate and better fund public schools. Behind the scenes, they were open to including a tax-credit scholarship.

Invest in Kids emerged from the closed-door negotiations that finally broke the impasse.

State lawmakers agreed in 2021 to extend the program for a year, with the backing of trade unions that supported additional money for the creation of private vocational schools. Those unions offered their support again this year.

Some advocates, who hoped for another extension, became concerned in the spring when Brandon Johnson, a former middle school teacher and organizer with the Chicago Teachers Union, became mayor of Chicago. Johnson beat Democrat Paul Vallas, a former CEO of Chicago Public Schools, who favored school vouchers and charter schools.

“His victory surprised a lot of people,” said Greg Richmond, superintendent of the Archdiocese of Chicago Catholic Schools. “I had a friend who works in the political arena, he called me two days after the mayoral election and he said, ‘I hope I’m wrong, but I’m just letting you know the scholarship program is now dead.’”

The perception was that “elected officials would want to be on the right side of the CTU,” he added.

Still, in October, Pritzker said he would sign a bill if lawmakers sent it to him. A spokesperson from the governor’s office told Chalkbeat Chicago in late October, “he won’t veto something that passed with a majority supporting it.”

Republican lawmakers urged Welch to bring the bill to a vote on the House floor last week and expressed deep frustration that he didn’t do so.

Rep. William Hauter, a Republican representing a district in central Illinois between Peoria and Springfield, mocked his colleagues from the floor Thursday. “I stand to just congratulate the majority power party who has stood firmly against the Invest in Kids program.”

He called Democrats’ commitment to kill the program “breathtaking.”

In a veto session, a bill requires three-fifths vote to pass. Cassie Creswell, executive director and president of Illinois Families for Public Schools, a public education advocacy group, said Welch might not have wanted to call the bill because it didn’t have enough support from Democratic lawmakers.

“He does not want to call bills that are going to divide his caucus,” she said.

Opponents celebrate ‘historic win’

When the veto session ended on Thursday, opponents cheered the end of Invest in Kids. They said the program lacked transparency and accountability when it came to reporting who received public dollars, and it gave public money to religious schools that discriminate against LGBTQ students.

Public schools have to report academic and disciplinary data to the Illinois State Board of Education, which is included annually in the state’s report card. Similar data for Invest in Kids is not available, though students enrolled in private schools with the help of a tax-credit scholarship are required to take state standardized tests.

“We do not know test scores. We don’t know graduation rates. We don’t know discipline information. We don’t know who attends,” said Creswell. “We don’t know how anyone spent $250 million they got over these last five years. So no transparency and no oversight.”

The Illinois Department of Revenue has issued an annual report on Invest in Kids for the past five years. But much of the individual school level data is suppressed because of student privacy laws. Aggregate data collected in the most recent annual report showed 56% of students supported by tax-credit scholarships last school year were white, 32% were Hispanic or Latino, 20% were Black, and 12.5% identified as other.

Roughly two-thirds were from families whose income was below 185% of the federal poverty line — or $49,025 for a family of four in the 2022-23 school year.

Rep. Angelica Guerrero-Cuellar, a Democrat and the lead sponsor of HB 4149, said she hopes to bring new legislation in the spring.

Guerrero-Cuellar, who represents neighborhoods on the city’s southwest side and west suburbs, said more than 400 students in her district use the tax-credit scholarship to attend private schools.

“This is a critical and needed program for a lot of people,” she said. “We have food deserts, health deserts, and educational deserts.”

But some supporters of the program think a last-minute save is unlikely after lawmakers declined to act last spring and then again in the veto session.

Anthony Holter, president of Empower Illinois, one of the largest scholarship-granting organizations for the program, said he doesn’t know how “feasible it is and whether the conditions in the spring would be any different.”

Parents and students hold signs inside the Illinois State Capitol building as they rally in support of the state's tax-credit scholarship program. The tax-credit scholarship is set to sunset at the end of 2023 after lawmakers didn't act.

Supporters worry about the future for scholarship students

Some supporters of Invest in Kids worry about the long term-effects on students and schools when the tax-credit scholarship program ends.

Tracy Smith, a mother of twin boys whose tuition is supported with the help of a tax-credit scholarship, said that without an extension, private schools could close and teachers could be laid off from their jobs. She also said that ending Invest in Kids would take away families’ right to choose a school that is right for their kids.

“You’re going to have an influx of more students going into a system that they don’t want to be a part of,” said Smith. “If they don’t extend the program, you’re taking away their choice.”

Richmond, superintendent of schools for the Archdiocese of Chicago, said some Catholic schools could face closure without the scholarship program.

“Some of our schools have 50 kids on scholarship or more,” he said. “When a school loses that number of students then the school’s future is also at risk. It’s not just the 50 students whose education is at risk.”

Some donors have already reached out about helping students stay in their schools, he said.

Christine Boyd, principal of St. Mary of the Lake and St. Thomas of Canterbury Catholic schools on the North Side of Chicago, said the vast majority of the schools’ 300 students were on scholarship. Most of the students are African immigrants who speak two languages at home, she said, and the school has a “robust” program for English language learners.

The loss of the scholarship program “will be very devastating to our community and to the school,” Boyd said.

Roni Facen, principal at St. Francis de Sales High School on the city’s Southeast Side, said that she has 55 students who are a part of Invest in Kids. She said some of the students won’t be able to continue attending the school.

The school is located in a predominantly Black and Latino neighborhood and many families are low-income, she said. Facen said that the school gives a scholarship to all students to help them attend.

“I’m gonna do everything I know how to do to keep my babies here. But it doesn’t mean that it’s going to be an easy fight,” said Facen.

Villalobos, the mother of four, was angry when lawmakers waited until the last minute to make a decision on the scholarship and disappointed that the program was not extended.

“There’s so many unforeseen things that happen in life. No matter how financially stable or healthy you are, things can change in the blink of an eye,” said Villalobos. “This is such a wonderful cushion to have for hard times.”

Now she’s trying to figure out her next step. She wants to keep her daughters at St. Gall, which offers before- and after-school care and social-emotional and academic support. But now that Invest in Kids is ending, she doesn’t know what she’ll do.

Becky Vevea contributed reporting.

Samantha Smylie is the state education reporter for Chalkbeat Chicago covering school districts across the state, legislation, special education and the state board of education. Contact Samantha at ssmylie@chalkbeat.org.

Cara Fitzpatrick is a story editor at Chalkbeat. Contact Cara at cfitzpatrick@chalkbeat.org.

First religious charter school approved in Oklahoma despite state ban

2023-06-06T00:59:45+00:00

Sign up for Chalkbeat’s free weekly newsletter to keep up with how public education is changing.

A state board in Oklahoma voted Monday to approve an application for the country’s first religious charter school, despite a state law prohibiting such schools.

If it opens as planned, St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School would offer students an explicitly religious curriculum based on the teachings of the Catholic Church.

The move sets the stage for a lengthy legal battle that could well reach the U.S. Supreme Court. The ensuing debate could also splinter the charter school movement. And the result could ultimately lead to the growth of religious charter schools around the country.

“Politicians in Oklahoma and some of these other states want this. They see the Supreme Court moving in that direction,” said Preston Green, an education and law professor at the University of Connecticut who has long written about the possibility of religious charter schools. “It has major implications nationwide. “

The Oklahoma Statewide Virtual Charter School Board voted 3-2 to approve the application. Last month, board members unanimously rejected the school’s initial proposal, citing a number of issues including constitutional questions about the separation of church and state.

On Monday, board members were divided on the legal implications of approving a religious charter school. Before the vote, Robert Franklin, the board’s chair, called the vote “weighty,” and warned the board that a religious charter doesn’t align with the state constitution and was “outside” the advice of the board’s legal counsel.

Another board member, Scott Strawn, said he received more than 3,000 emails about the issue. “We’ve heard… the entirety of an argument and a constitutional debate in this room today,” he said.

Franklin voted no, while Strawn voted yes. Both said they were acting according to their oaths as public officials.

A new board member, Brian Bobek, also voted yes. Franklin had asked Bobek to abstain since he had only been appointed Friday. He replaced Barry Beauchamp, who had continued to serve after his term expired, according to the Tulsa World.

Oklahoma’s charter statute states that such schools must be “free from sectarian control.” But supporters of religious charter schools insist that this prohibition amounts to religious discrimination and violates the U.S. Constitution. They cite a string of U.S. Supreme Court cases that concluded that states cannot bar private schools from receiving public funds just because they are religious.

“Recent decisions of the United States Supreme Court make clear that states may not exclude religious schools from participating in public benefit programs that support K-12 education,” the charter’s application states.

However, those rulings do not speak directly to charter schools. Such cases “concerning private schools have little precedential value as it relates to charter schools,” wrote current Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond earlier this year. (Drummond withdrew an earlier opinion from the prior attorney general, John O’Connor, who argued that Oklahoma’s bar on religious charter schools was likely unconstitutional.)

The group Americans United for Separation of Church and State said Monday that it was preparing a lawsuit over the charter approval.

Ultimately the legality of religious charter schools may hinge on whether charter schools are considered private or public entities. On Monday, the board’s legal counsel called that distinction the “heart of the matter.”

If charter schools are deemed public — “state actors” in legal terms — they would likely not be able to be religious. If they are private, the Supreme Court’s recent rulings would logically seem to apply.

Supporters have long argued that charter schools are public, and state laws define them as such. But charter schools are run by private boards, and courts have split on how to treat them for legal purposes. The U.S. Supreme Court is currently considering taking a case on whether charter schools are public or private for the purposes of a discrimination suit under the 14th Amendment.

Some legal experts believe the Supreme Court’s conservative majority would be sympathetic to religious charter schools — continuing a two-decade march of cases that have made it easier to subsidize private education with public dollars.

“I just think if this case comes up to the Supreme Court, they’ve got the numbers,” said Green.

Charter schools could face existential moment

The prospect of private, religious charter schools would amount to a stunning shift for the charter school movement. Charter schools have long garnered bipartisan support, including from many progressive supporters as an alternative to private school vouchers.

The country’s leading charter school advocacy group has staunchly opposed religious charter schools and quickly condemned Monday’s approval of the Oklahoma school.

“The Archdiocese of Oklahoma City is trying to make charter schools into something they are not,” said Nina Rees, president and CEO of the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools, in a statement. “We stand ready to support charter school advocates on the ground in Oklahoma as they fight to preserve the public nature of these unique schools and protect the religious and civil rights of the students and teachers who choose them.”

Leaders of the planned Oklahoma charter school have not said whether they would admit gay or transgender students. Oklahoma law requires charter schools to offer open enrollment and to conduct a lottery if there are more applicants than seats.

In its charter application, the church vowed to comply with state and federal law — while indicating it would seek “religious exemptions … with priority given to the Catholic Church’s understanding of itself and its rights and obligations pursuant to the Code of Canon Law and the Catechism of the Catholic Church.”

The school’s proposed employee handbook notes: “All employees are expected to adhere to and support the positions and beliefs of the Roman Catholic Church in the performance of their duties.”

Some private Catholic schools have fired teachers for marrying a same-sex partner.

“Charter school laws were passed based on assurances that they are public schools open to all students,” said Robert Kim, executive director of Education Law Center, a legal advocacy organization that is typically critical of charter schools. “Allowing a religious charter school upends the very notion of public education by endorsing a school that has signaled it does not consider itself fully bound by state or federal laws, including non-discrimination requirements, that are essential to a public education system.”

The possibility of religious charter schools could also spill beyond conservative states like Oklahoma and into blue states with charters, like California and New York. That’s because advocates of religious charter schools have argued that not only are such schools allowed, but that prohibiting them violates the Constitution.

“If they can be religious, states with charter schools must permit religious charter schools,” Notre Dame law professor Nicole Stelle Garnett, a leading advocate of religious charter schools, has argued.

The Archdiocese of Oklahoma City proposed the online charter school as a way to reach students in rural areas with few local schools. Named for the patron saint of the internet, the St. Isidore school aims to enroll students from kindergarten through 12th grade.

“The mission of St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School is to educate the entire child: soul, heart, intellect, and body,” the application states. It would seek to merge “the best of online instruction with its capacity for individualized flexible learning.”

Before Monday’s vote, several people told the board that they opposed religious charter schools.

Doug Mann, a lawyer from the Oklahoma Parent Legislative Action Committee, a group that supports public education, said it was clear from St. Isidore’s application that the school “will seek to indoctrinate” students in Catholic beliefs. He warned that the board could face a court challenge.

“There are dire consequences to this board if it goes forward with this,” he said.

Some board members who voted to approve the application Monday said they were ultimately persuaded that a no vote would violate the U.S. Constitution. Bobek, the board’s newest member, said it could “hardly be clearer to me” that it is the Oklahoma statutes that are unconstitutional.

Strawn, who had previously expressed some concerns about the application, said he concluded that voting it down would violate his oath to uphold the U.S. Constitution.

Franklin, the board’s chair, said he took the same oath, but “I just can’t get there.” He said a yes vote was a “hard no.”

Kalyn Belsha contributed to this story.

Cara Fitzpatrick is a story editor at Chalkbeat.

Matt Barnum is a national reporter covering education policy, politics, and research. Contact him at mbarnum@chalkbeat.org.

Religious charter school rejected in Oklahoma, but a national fight looms

2023-04-12T00:36:59+00:00

Chalkbeat is a nonprofit news organization covering public education in communities across America. Sign up for our free weekly newsletter to keep up with how public education is changing.

A state board in Oklahoma voted down Tuesday an application for the country’s first religious charter school, highlighting the legal uncertainty around using tax dollars to directly pay for religious education.

In rejecting the school’s initial application, board members acknowledged that the larger issue of whether religious charter schools pass legal muster would likely be settled by the U.S. Supreme Court. The court has already ruled that states cannot exclude religious schools from private school choice programs.

If the court eventually rules in favor of religious charter schools, as some legal experts expect, it could have broad implications for the separation of church and state, as well as lead to more charter schools and less money for traditional public schools.

“This is a huge deal,” said Preston Green, an education law professor at the University of Connecticut, “and not just for red states, but for the entire country.”

The unanimous vote, which came after about two hours of discussion by Oklahoma’s five-member Statewide Virtual Charter School Board, delayed a final decision on the application for St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School. The school can submit a revised application, which could come before the board again as soon as next month.

Board members raised a number of issues with the application, from how the proposed charter school would serve students with disabilities to its management structure to how it would ensure internet connectivity for students. But the thorniest question was whether it was even legal to approve a charter school with an explicitly religious mission.

“The constitutional issue is a big high hurdle,” said Board Chairperson Robert Franklin.

Another board member, Scott Strawn, said, “Is it settled law? That’s the gray area we’re all living in.”

The Catholic Church in Oklahoma City and Tulsa proposed the online charter school as a way to reach students in rural areas with few local schools. Named for the patron saint of the internet, the St. Isidore school would eventually enroll up to 1,500 students statewide in kindergarten through 12th grade.

Charter schools are publicly funded but operated by private groups rather than local school boards. Some religious groups run charter schools, but the schools are fully secular.

By contrast, the Oklahoma charter school would be explicitly religious. The school application says Catholic schools are “places of evangelization” that serve the mission of the church. The online charter school would display religious symbols such as crucifixes, and students would study religion and attend church services, the application says.

Before the vote Tuesday, the board heard from several commenters opposed to religious charter schools.

Bruce Prescott, a retired Baptist minister, said religious charter schools would “upend the entire educational landscape in Oklahoma.”

“One of the hallmarks of public schools in America is that they are non-discriminatory and secular in their acceptance of all students regardless of their faith or beliefs,” he said.

A proposed religious charter school sparks debate

Critics say the proposed school would violate state laws and the “establishment clause” in the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment, which prohibits the government from endorsing any religion. They have also raised concerns that the school could discriminate against students or employees based on their religion, sexual orientation, or gender identity.

In its application, the church said the school would adopt an anti-discrimination policy, but would also defer to Catholic teachings on issues such as marriage and homosexuality, which the church considers immoral when acted upon. In interviews, Oklahoma church officials have declined to say whether the school would admit openly gay or transgender students.

“St. Isidore plans to, or at the very least reserves the right to, unlawfully discriminate in admissions and employment,” said a letter to the state virtual charter school board from Americans United for Separation of Church and State, a legal advocacy group that opposes the proposed school.

Proponents of the school argue that it is the state’s charter school law, not the proposed school, that violates the First Amendment. They say that stopping religious groups from operating charter schools according to their faith amounts to religious discrimination.

In December, Oklahoma’s former Republican attorney general issued an opinion saying the state’s ban on religious charter schools likely violated the First Amendment. But shortly after, the state’s newly elected Republican attorney general withdrew the opinion, saying it tried to “justify state-funded religion.”

The state’s Republican governor attacked the move by Attorney General Gentner Drummond.

“You contend that the United States and the Oklahoma Constitutions permit, and indeed require, the state to discriminate against religious organizations seeking authorization to operate charter schools,” Gov. Kevin Stitt wrote in a letter to Drummond. “In fact, the opposite is true.”

Several members of the statewide virtual charter school board noted the differing legal opinions in the discussion Tuesday. Franklin, the board chair, said he asked prior to the meeting if board members would have legal protection and “support from the attorney general’s office” if they were sued after the final decision.

“We’re not going to be able to answer that legal question,” he said.

The big legal question: Are charter schools public or private?

Both sides of the debate about whether charter schools can be religious tend to agree that, under the U.S. Constitution, public schools cannot promote religion. Where they disagree is whether charter schools are truly public schools.

In legal terms, the question is whether charter schools are “state actors.” If so, they cannot impose religious beliefs on students.

Derek Black, a law professor at the University of South Carolina, said charter schools are clearly state actors.

“I would say there’s 101 reasons why they are state actors,” he said, “and none why they are not.”

He noted that charter schools and traditional public schools both receive public money, cannot charge tuition or turn students away, and must adhere to state academic standards. Unlike traditional public schools, charter schools don’t answer to elected school boards and they enjoy flexibility from some state regulations. But those qualities don’t make charter schools “private actors,” Black argued.

If Oklahoma were to approve the plan for a religious charter school, the state would essentially be endorsing the school’s religious beliefs, Black said.

“That is the state adopting private religious beliefs as the state’s curriculum,” he said. “That stamp all by itself is state action.”

But proponents of religious charter schools argue they are more private than public.

Nicole Stelle Garnett, a law professor at the University of Notre Dame, said charter schools do not qualify as state actors because their actions cannot be attributed to the government. In fact, she argues, the premise behind charter schools is that they operate independently of the state in a way that traditional public schools cannot.

“That’s kind of the whole point of charter schools,” she said, “to foster pluralism and foster innovation by giving them freedom from government control.”

Whether or not charter schools are state actors is at the heart of a legal case in North Carolina, where a student sued a charter school that requires girls to wear skirts. The school has argued that it is not subject to federal anti-discrimination laws because it is not a state actor.

A lower court ruled against the school, which appealed to the Supreme Court. In January, the court asked the Biden administration to weigh in on the matter, which could signal the court’s interest in the legal question.

Based on recent Supreme Court rulings that said states cannot stop religious schools from receiving public benefits, some legal experts think the court’s conservative majority will declare that charter schools are not state actors — and therefore free to promote religious beliefs. Such a ruling would raise a new set of issues, including whether religious charter schools may discriminate against students or staffers on religious grounds.

“Those are questions that remain unanswered,” Garnett said.

Some of the original proponents of charter schools, however, say any attempt to mix charter schools and religious instruction runs counter to the intent of those schools.

“If a religious school receives public funding, that is not a charter school and should not be called that,” said Ember Reichgott Junge, a former Democratic state senator in Minnesota who wrote the senate version of the country’s first charter school law, which passed in 1991. “It’s something else.”

Patrick Wall is a senior reporter covering national education issues. Contact him at pwall@chalkbeat.org. Cara Fitzpatrick is a story editor at Chalkbeat.

Meet our newest story editor, Cara Fitzpatrick

2020-08-28T22:00:17+00:00

I moved nearly 3,000 miles from my home in Washington State to take my first job as an education reporter. I was so excited to cover education that I agreed to work in an office I had never seen, in a part of Florida I had never visited. I started the job just before Christmas, when all of the other reporters were on vacation. I was sitting in an empty newsroom, listening to the scattershot noises of the police scanner, when the door burst open and in walked one of the most colorful characters I have ever encountered in a newsroom: the gossip columnist.

He grabbed a desk nearby, and I listened with a mixture of horror and fascination as he spoke to a source. Every third word out of his mouth was profanity. Finally, he hung up the phone and introduced himself. When I said that I was the new education reporter, he scrunched up his nose and spit out words I’ll never forget.

“No one cares about education. Find the scandals. They care about scandals,” he said.

You might expect that attitude from a gossip columnist, but I have encountered it many times in my 18 years as a journalist, often from editors who had the power to shape news coverage of their communities. The idea that education is somehow less important, less interesting, or less relevant than politics, business, or crime has always been wrong. These last few months — as public and private schools across the country have closed their buildings and struggled to reopen during the coronavirus pandemic — have shown just how wrong. The vital and complex role that schools play in our society has been vividly demonstrated for the doubters. There has, perhaps, never been a more important time to invest in education journalism.

That’s why I am proud to join Chalkbeat as a story editor, working with our bureaus in Chicago and Philadelphia. As a growing nonprofit news organization, Chalkbeat has a mission about which I care deeply. Journalists here are “committed to covering one of America’s most important stories: the effort to improve schools for all children, especially those who have historically lacked access to a quality education.”

When done well, education coverage is about race, gender, class, and politics. It’s about racism and sexism. It’s about housing and income. Covering education isn’t just worthwhile for news organizations that are invested in their communities. It’s essential.

During my career in journalism, I have sometimes had to fight to write stories about children who weren’t well served by the American education system, particularly Black students in under-resourced communities. At times, the message that I should focus on other students or other schools was conveyed subtly. Other times, it was explicit. And yet, some of my best work as a reporter was done in defiance of that message. At Chalkbeat, coverage is centered around equity and, in my short time here, I have seen how seriously the reporters, editors, and other staff members take that mission.

In Philadelphia, where Chalkbeat just launched its newest bureau, senior writer Dale Mezzacappa, explained one of the reasons that she has continued to write about education: “Bluntly, the American system doesn’t just tolerate racial and economic segregation and inequity, it is built on it. And it sucks all of us in. Without a second thought, individual families build their lives around the idea of ‘moving to a good school district,’ which most often means leaving one that has many low-income students (and usually, students of color) for one that has fewer.”

Chalkbeat also has a deep commitment to local news, with eight bureaus operating across the country. It’s both thrilling and bittersweet to join a news organization that is expanding. In the last two decades, I have worked at four local newspapers. All four have gone through devastating and repeated rounds of layoffs and buyouts, while closing regional bureaus and shrinking coverage areas. Every education team I have been part of has grown smaller, and the two bureaus I worked in years ago have closed. Like so many journalists, I have endured pay cuts, abysmal health insurance, and starting a family without the benefit of paid maternity leave.

The collapse of local news has been devastating, with so many of my former colleagues leaving the news industry. It is because of these experiences that I value what Chalkbeat has been able to build: a sustainable nonprofit newsroom with a diverse mix of funding that serves as a model for other news organizations.

Despite all of the changes in journalism, I have been fortunate to continue to cover education, first as a reporter and now as an editor. It is the easiest thing in the world to accept a job at a news organization I admire, with colleagues I rely on — first, as a reader — to tell one of America’s most important news stories.