The Supreme Court is taking on some important education questions, from transgender protections to school choice, during its next term.
The conservative-leaning high court is expected to consider another effort by President Biden on student loans, among other high-profile cases, and could add more to its docket as efforts by Republican states to bring more Christianity into courtrooms class face legal challenges.
Here are some of the issues before the court that could have far-reaching impacts on education in the United States:
Biden’s Income-Based Repayment Plan
Biden’s new Savings for Valuable Education (SAVE) plan for student debt relief is the subject of two cases right now led by different groups of Republican states that consider it illegal.
The SAVE plan began last fall with the Biden administration increasing the income protected student loan payments from 150% above federal poverty guidelines to 225%. The rest of the plan was set to begin this month, which included undergraduate loan payments going from 10% of discretionary income to 5% and new rules about how long a person needs to pay off loans before receiving forgiveness.
“Millions of borrowers are already benefiting from enrolling in the SAVE plan, and I’m thrilled to see so many Americans submitting applications every day so they too can take advantage of the most affordable student loan repayment plan in history,” Education Secretary Miguel Cardona spoke about the plan.
Several GOP-led states fought to avoid the July changes.
“Once again, the president is attempting to unilaterally impose an extraordinarily expensive and controversial policy that he has failed to pass through Congress,” said a lawsuit filed by Missouri.
The judges in both court cases ruled that the Biden administration could move forward with reducing monthly payments. However, a judge said the president could not actually forgive any loans under the SAVE plan.
Despite the Republicans’ partial victory, South Carolina, Texas and Alaska appealed urgently to the Supreme Court to also reverse the lower payments.
The request has been forwarded to Justice Neil Gorsuch, and a decision on the matter or whether the high court will take up the case could come at any time.
Transgender Policies
The Supreme Court will examine 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 if a student changes their name or pronouns at school.
West Virginia is appealing to the Supreme Court after an appeals court ruled that a transgender high school athlete could compete on the team that aligns with their gender identity.
“We will not allow swamp elites to impose their values on the citizens of West Virginia,” said state Attorney General Patrick Morrisey.
Meanwhile, in Parents Protecting Our Children v. Eau Claire Area School District, a group of Wisconsin parents want the Supreme Court to overturn the lower courts’ decision to dismiss the case, in which they argue authorities’ plan not to tell parents if their child has changed their name or pronoun it is unconstitutional.
The issue has made national headlines recently, with California becoming the first state to enact law that parents do not need to be notified if their children change their name or pronouns unless they attempt to do so on their official school transcript.
The law in California now faces its own lawsuit, with challengers making the same arguments that are making their way to the high court.
“This is a deeply unserious lawsuit seemingly designed to fan the dumpster fire formerly known as Twitter rather than surface legitimate legal claims,” said Izzy Gardon, spokeswoman for Gov. Gavin Newsom (D), previously on the The Hill. child-parent relationship, California law ensures that minors cannot legally change their name or gender without parental consent, and parents continue to have guaranteed and full access to their students’ educational records in accordance with federal law. We are confident that the State will quickly prevail in this case.”
School choice
A school choice measure that has become popular across the country is making its way to the high court due to a legal challenge in Michigan, where opponents say a constitutional amendment prohibiting direct or indirect public financial support for private schools violates the 14thth Amendment.
The measure blocks the promotion of education savings accounts (ESAs), which allow parents who want to send their children to private schools or home schools to receive an annual stipend from the government
“When no-aid clauses target parents, the result is substantial harm to primary and secondary education. The Court must consider whether such targeting is unlawful,” EdChoice and the Defense of Freedom Institute said in an amicus brief to the court.
The school choice measure was denounced by Democrats as sucking public funds from schools in an attempt to undermine them.
“My main issue as a classroom teacher and parent is that this directly defunds our local public schools,” Beth Lewis, director of Save Our Schools in Arizona, previously told The Hill.
“A second reason why the ESA voucher is a problem is that there is no transparency or accountability, and this is built into the design. So we have no idea how taxpayer money is 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 potential new ones
A group of parents is suing Attorney General Merrick Garland over a memo at school board meetings that they say unfairly targeted them.
The memo focused on a “disturbing increase in harassment, intimidation and threats of violence” during COVID-19, but Republicans seized on it, saying it treats concerned parents like “domestic terrorists.”
The case, titled Saline Parents v. Merrick B. Garland, was rejected by the lower courts.
“The purported AG Policy is not regulatory, proscriptive, or mandatory in nature because it does not impose any regulations, requirements, or enforcement actions on individuals,” said U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich. “None of the documents that the plaintiffs allege set forth the policy create an imminent threat of future legal action against anyone, much less the plaintiffs.”
The court will also handle another school admissions case, Boston Parent Coalition for Academic Excellence Corp. v.
The plaintiff in the situation is arguing that the new admissions plan for Boston’s three highly selective Exam Schools during COVID-19 is unconstitutional.
The plan eliminated the testing requirement to focus on socioeconomic inclusion and racial diversity, which the plaintiffs argue is a race-based quota program.
The case comes after the Supreme Court ruled in 2023 that higher education could no longer use affirmative action in the admissions process.
Although it hasn’t reached court yet, it’s likely that a case over how much religion is allowed in public schools could be on the table soon.
Louisiana has enacted a law requiring the Ten Commandments to be hung in classrooms, while Oklahoma is directing schools to use the Bible as a teaching tool in numerous classes.
“If we didn’t have this extreme shift to the right with the U.S. Supreme Court, this would be a very easy issue. Yes, [the laws] would be knocked down […] but the current Supreme Court has not shown much hesitation in reversing prior precedent, and therefore all bets are off,” Kevin Welner, a professor at the School of Education at the University of Colorado at Boulder, previously told The Hill.
This story originally appeared on thehill.com read the full story
