Columbus, OH – On Monday, The Buckeye Institute filed an important amicus brief in Columbus City School District v. State of Ohio, calling on Ohio’s 10th District Court of Appeals to protect school choice for parents and students who have benefited from voucher programs and those who will benefit from them in the future.

“School choice is being threatened by a coalition of disgruntled and self-interested districts that previously tried and failed to end Ohio’s groundbreaking Cleveland Scholarship and Tutoring Program. That initial effort was rejected by the U.S. Supreme Court, and The Buckeye Institute remains confident that this newest and even more ill-advised attempt will meet a similar fate,” said Robert Alt, president and chief executive officer of The Buckeye Institute.

For decades, Ohio’s public education system forced students to attend failing schools, unless their parents could afford to move or the cost of a private education. This injustice changed in 1995, when a bipartisan coalition convinced the General Assembly to establish Ohio’s first school choice program. Tirelessly championed by The Buckeye Institute, Ohio’s school choice options enabled countless families in urban and rural communities, and students of all races and financial means, to gain access to the education setting that best meets their individual needs.

The Buckeye Institute argues in its brief that the lower court functionally granted itself a line-item veto over state spending decisions that could open the door to an untold number of future lawsuits. This court-created line-item veto would allow districts to claim that state funds spent anywhere else—including on Medicaid, which makes up 37.70 percent of the budget—reduce the finite amount of taxpayer dollars available for public school districts.

“Although the name of this case is Columbus City School District v. State of Ohio, it is a clash between parents who want educational opportunities for their children and the public-school establishment that resents the success and popularity of school choice and bristles at the principle on which that disruptive alternative stands: that parents, not school districts, should control K-12 education for their children,” said Greg R. Lawson, research fellow at The Buckeye Institute.

# # #