Court ruling puts Ohio school vouchers in limbo
And they'll get it in the new Ohio budget that contains more than $700 million for vouchers that will go to private and parochial schools.
GOP deficit hawks list complaints on megabill ahead of vote
Last week, a Franklin County judge declared Ed Choice vouchers to be unconstitutional, but the order was delayed pending an appeal.
In 2024, the state of Ohio spent nearly $1 billion on private school vouchers, with leaders of School Choice Ohio saying it's money well spent, giving parents and students educational options.
'We've placed children in private schools using Ed Choice,' School Choice Ohio President Eric 'Yitz' Frank said. 'We find options in public schools that work best for them so we are kind of agnostic about where people go to school, but we do believe they should have the ability to take their tax dollars and go to a school of their choice, whether it's a private or a public school.'
'The only difference is who pays for it?' teacher and Cleveland Heights School Board Member Dan Heintz said. 'Ohio went very successfully for a century with great private schools and great public schools, and it's really only been about the last 20 years that the private schools started to expect their neighbors, citizens from around the state to underwrite their decision to send their children to a private school.'
How to get your unclaimed Ohio funds before they go to the Cleveland Browns
Heintz is part of the Vouchers Hurt Ohio group that is suing the state. Their first victory came in Franklin County Common Pleas Court.
'The 'why not' is the Ohio state constitution, and that's what we saw Judge Page here in Franklin County decide this week when she ruled that Ed Choice vouchers are a violation of the state constitution,' Heintz said.
Page ruled that lawmakers are violating the Ohio constitution by creating a second system of schools that receive an unreasonably high level of per-student tax dollars.
Critics also point out that vouchers were promised to pull poor students out of underperforming districts, but vouchers often go to affluent families in high-ranking public school districts who never intend to send their children to public schools.
Project underway to help relieve I-270/71 congestion on North Side
'There are kids that thrive in really what we would call poor-performing schools and there are kids that struggle in really what we consider to be, objectively, affluent schools and so putting the parents in the driver's seat, we think, will ultimately get better outcomes,' Frank said.
And, for now, parochial and private schools will continue to receive public dollars.
The vouchers are in the budget signed by Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine. The state is poised to appeal the finding in Franklin County Common Pleas Court that the vouchers are unconstitutional. It is expected that the case will go all the way to the Ohio Supreme Court, where Republicans hold all but one seat.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Leaked chart reveals winners and losers in California's Democratic gerrymander
More details on California Democrats' proposed overhaul to the state congressional map are coming to light in advance of the official release of the new boundaries. State lawmakers were briefed Wednesday evening on the expected partisan tilt of all 52 congressional districts, providing the clearest view yet of which Republican districts they are targeting. The changes, which are not yet final, were detailed in a chart obtained by POLITICO and confirmed by multiple legislators and staffers. CD-1, the rural northeastern corner of the state represented by Republican Rep. Doug LaMalfa, transforms from safe Republican to safe Democratic CD-3, a sprawling district along California's eastern border represented by GOP Rep. Kevin Kiley, goes from safe Republican to safe Democratic CD-9, Democratic Rep. Josh Harder's northern Central Valley district, moves from lean Democratic to safe Democratic CD-13, a Central Valley seat narrowly won last year by Democratic Rep. Adam Gray, changes from lean Republican to safe Democratic CD-27, a northern Los Angeles County seat held by Democratic Rep. George Whitesides, moves from lean Democratic to safe Democratic CD-41, a battleground seat held by GOP Rep. Ken Calvert, transforms from safe Republican to safe Democratic CD-45, which Democratic Rep. Derek Tran won last year in the most expensive race in the country, goes from lean Democratic to safe Democratic CD-47, an Orange County district represented by Democratic Rep. Dave Min, moves from lean Democratic to safe Democratic CD-48, which spans Riverside and San Diego counties and is held by GOP Rep. Darrell Issa, changes from safe Republican to lean Democratic. The new maps could also see more Democrats added into the Central Valley district of GOP Rep. David Valadao, who has already been able to defy gravity in a seat with a Democratic registration advantage. Gov. Gavin Newsom, speaking to reporters after he kicked off the campaign to give voters final approval over the still-unreleased districts, teased their imminent debut. "People are eager to see the maps,' he said. 'We anticipate that these maps will completely neuter and neutralize what is happening in Texas." Republicans are already denouncing the move. The nine-member California Republican House delegation released a joint statement Thursday pointing to the newest POLITICO-Citrin Center-Possibility Lab survey which found strong bipartisan majorities prefer district lines be drawn by an independent commission than lawmakers. 'Governor Newsom is trying to grab power away from the citizens on the commission and give it to Sacramento politicians to gerrymander their own districts,' the statement said. 'Our delegation will stand with the citizens of California and defend their rights as they stand today in our state constitution by opposing Newsom's ballot measure. All Californians, regardless of their political affiliation, should vote NO on this attempt to eliminate the Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission's ability to draw fair congressional districts.' The unveiling of the maps as soon as Friday sets the stage for a week-long sprint through the Legislature. Legislators must approve a constitutional amendment to be approved by the voters, as well as companion bills to put the maps in statute as well address the cost of the special election and other logistics. The bills are expected to be heard by the elections committees in both houses on Tuesday and appropriations committees on Wednesday before final floor votes Thursday. The breakneck speed means that none of the measures can be amended without facing a delay under the 72-hour rule.
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Democrats release proposed new California congressional map
Democrats on Friday released a proposed new California congressional map as they aim to counter Republican-led redistricting efforts in Texas. The proposal was submitted to the state legislature on behalf of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) and comes as the latest development in an intensifying redistricting fight. 'Earlier today, the DCCC submitted a proposed congressional map to the legislative public portal with collaborative input from stakeholders and legislators. We anticipate this proposal will have widespread support both among California office holders and various stakeholders across the state,' executive director Julie Merz said in a release. 'We will not stand by as Republicans attempt to rig the election in their favor and choose their voters.' California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) is vying to hold a special election this fall on a ballot measure that would suspend the state's independent redistricting commission until the end of the decade in an effort to keep up with Republican gerrymandering. Newsom has stressed that bypassing the commission, which Californians approved back in 2008 and 2010, would be temporary, and that redrawing the lines would only be triggered by redistricting in red states. Democrats in the California legislature are expected to move the measure forward when they reconvene next week, teeing up a November special election. The proposed maps are expected to effectively neutralize the would-be gains in Texas, where a plan backed by President Trump could net five GOP House seats, by creating five blue districts in California. The Republican incumbents effected by the new map are Reps. Kevin Kiley (R), Doug LaMalfa (R), Darrell Issa (R), Ken Calvert (R) and David Valadao (R). 'They do five seats, we do five seats,' Newsom has said. Democrats in the Texas state legislature fled earlier this month in a desperate bid to stall the GOP plan from moving forward, but they've signaled they could return if, among other conditions, California introduced its maps to counter the Lone Star State. 'I love my current congressional district, but I understand the stakes. Democracy is on the line,' Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) said on X as news of the map broke. 'When this new map is approved by voters, I look forward to running in the new 42nd district, made up of my hometown of Long Beach, coastal OC, Costa Mesa & South Santa Ana. Let's go!' The National Democratic Redistricting Committee (NDRC) backed the maps, calling California's plan a 'measured response' to counteract Trump's 'blatant power grab in Texas. The Republicans' congressional campaign arm blasted the redistricting moves on Friday, arguing Newsom 'is shredding California's Constitution and disenfranchising voters to prop up his Presidential ambitions.'
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
CA redistricting 101: how we got here and what's next for a possible Nov. 4 vote
In June, with an eye on the 2026 midterms, President Donald Trump's administration began pressing Republicans in Texas to redraw congressional lines to shore up the GOP's razor thin majority and elect five more Republicans to the House. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican but no staunch ally of the president, initially demurred at redrawing district lines at the request of a sitting president for political gain. Then the Department of Justice, led by former San Francisco attorney Harmeet Dhillon, weighed in, charging four Houston and Fort Worth districts currently held by Black and Latino Democrats with being unfairly drawn along racial lines. The Supreme Court is also set to hear a Louisiana redistricting case in October that could weaken parts of the Voting Rights Act, a major accomplishment of the Civil Rights era. Abbott's push to redraw boundaries to boost the GOP's prospects has now sparked a proxy war with Democrats, led by California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who until recently was still viewed with suspicion even within his own party. Democrats, joined by organized labor, threw their weight behind his campaign, which launched Thursday. 'We need to disabuse ourselves of the way things have been done,' Newsom said, likening Trump's takeover of law enforcement in Washington, D.C. to an authoritarian takeover. 'It's not good enough to just hold hands, have a candlelight vigil and talk about the way the world should be.' The governor is pushing for the Legislature, poised to return from summer break next Monday, to approve a Nov. 4 special election to present voters with a map that would redistribute liberal voters into five districts currently held by Republican Reps. David Valadao, Darrell Issa, Ken Calvert, Doug LaMalfa, and Kevin Kiley. Democrats in California's 52-member congressional delegation have already tentatively approved the map, which would be in effect for the 2026, 2028, and 2030 elections. The Citizen Redistricting Commission, an independent entity first formed in 2008, would retain power over state legislative redistricting, and that body would regain power of congressional redistricting after the 2030 Census, Newsom said. After Trump ignored his request to block Texas from redistricting, Newsom launched his own campaign with a polished ad and backing from top House Democrats. A chart obtained by The Sacramento Bee later that day showed how Democrats intend to flip Calvert, Issa, Kiley and LaMalfa's districts to lean 'safely Democrat.' What would the process look like? The California Legislature is currently poised to jump into action when they return from summer recess Monday, August 18. According to the governor's office, legislators will consider a package that includes a bill calling for a special election, a bill that approves proposed maps, and one that approves reimbursement for county election costs. (On Thursday, a coalition of counties called on the state's leadership to provide funding in advance of the election to limit the strain on local budgets). Any legislation they want to pass must be in print for 72 hours, so if lawmakers want to vote on the bills during their floor session on Thursday (which they will have to do to meet a deadline of Friday August 22 set by the Secretary of State's office), the package will likely be put into print Monday. The Senate elections committee has set a hearing for Tuesday morning. Elections officials across the state are already preparing for a possible Nov. 4 vote. Neither the governor nor legislative leaders have spoken much about who is involved in the map-making process, other than that the end result would be put before voters. A spokesperson for Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, Nick Miller, said their office is 'aiming' to release the maps on Friday, Aug. 15. If voters choose to approve the measure, the real work begins for elections officials, who will need to update voter databases to meet the deadlines of a June primary election. How would it affect me and my district? We'll know more when the maps are released, but the districts that Democrats are committed to redrawing are those currently held by Republican Reps. David Valadao, Doug LaMalfa, Kevin Kiley, Darrell Issa and Ken Calvert, and the districts abutting those. All of those districts could be changed to include a broader Democratic voter base to make them more likely to elect a Democrat in the next election. That could mean taking a big city from a reliably blue district. How much will it cost? The Secretary of State's office estimates a special election would cost a little bit more than the last statewide election with nothing else on the ballot — about $200 million, with most of the costs coming from printing and mailing ballots. Newsom has said the cost would be reduced because of a number of pre-existing municipal elections, but aside from a county-wide election in Santa Clara county, most are small and wouldn't make a difference, according to elections officials. The state's Republican party is pegging the cost to be higher, at $235.5 million. In a news release, the Assembly Republican Caucus said the estimate was prepared by their Office of Policy and Budget, and accounts for inflation, increased postage costs and a larger number of registered voters since the last statewide special election. What precedent is there for a move like this? A deliberate Congressional gerrymander in response to another state's action is unprecedented in California. The last large mid-decade redistricting of congressional districts in California was in 1965, according to California State Librarian spokesperson Alex Vassar, when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled legislative districts should have roughly equal population sizes. Before that, mid-decade redistricting would happen if there were significant population changes, most often in the early days of the state's establishment. In general, Vassar said, redistricting follows the reapportionment of Congressional seats that happens in accordance with Census data. That's why legislatures around the country do redistricting after the 10-year census, a process that's been administered in California by the Citizens Redistricting Commission since 2010. In the background looms a pending Louisiana redistricting court case, which the U.S. Supreme Court is set to hear oral arguments for on Oct. 15, that could rewrite parts of the Voting Rights Act, which prohibits racial discrimination in voting. The plaintiffs, a group of 'self-described non-African-Americans,' are challenging their districts, saying they're biased in favor of Black candidates. What's the argument against this idea? Republicans, a handful of Democrats and some nonpartisan good government groups have opposed the idea. Assemblymember Alex Lee, D-San Jose, chair of the Legislative Progressive Caucus, described the whole thing as a 'race to the bottom of gerrymandering.' 'We understand the threat authoritarianism poses, but the way to fight it is not by breaking our own democratic safeguards,' said League of Women Voters Deputy Director Dora Rose in a statement. 'You don't save democracy by imitating those who seek to destroy it — you save it by inspiring voters with bold ideas and principled leadership.' National good governance group Common Cause initially opposed redistricting, but this week walked some of that back. In a statement, they said sticking to calls to respect independent redistricting would 'amount to a call for unilateral political disarmament in the face of authoritarian efforts to undermine fair representation and people-powered democracy.' In a media briefing with reporters on Wednesday, Common Cause board chair Martha Tierney blamed both parties for failing to fully embrace independent redistricting: 'We are here in this moment because the courts, Congress, political leaders have failed to act, and our country is sliding toward authoritarianism.' Critics argue that tit-for-tat political gerrymandering will further erode trust in government and hurt democracy. The mere thought of suspending maps drawn by California's nonpartisan redistricting commission, often hailed as 'the gold standard,' stoked fears about voter disenfranchisement. 'Independent redistricting commissions work because they put people first, not special interests or political parties,' said Patricia Sinay, a Democratic redistricting commissioner. 'Handing the power to incumbent legislators, lobbyists and special interests will bring back the political gamesmanship that brought us to independent redistricting in the first place.' Opponents argue that Newsom's push flies in the face of the principle the redistricting commission was founded on: voters should choose their elected officials, not the other way around. Rep. Kevin Kiley, R-Roseville, who could lose his House seat if it's redrawn to become more competitive, introduced federal legislation last week that would ban all mid-decade redistricting and called Newsom's plan 'a dangerous attack on democracy.' 'California voters have already settled this matter, voting that politicians should not draw district lines because it is an inherent conflict of interest,' Kiley said. 'While Newsom's scheme is especially undemocratic, redrawing district lines in the middle of the decade is unhealthy for representative government in general.' Would we go back? Newsom has said the responsibility of drawing the maps would go back to the Independent Redistricting Commission after the 2030 Census, and any ballot language would reflect that plan. Grant Reeher, a political science professor at Syracuse University's Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, said that outcome doesn't seem likely. He described the situation as a 'redistricting arms race' that will continue as long as there are states willing to out-gerrymander each other. If Democratic states redistrict to pick up more Democratic representatives, 'it's going to lead to Texas coming back and saying, 'Well, we're going to redraw next time too,'' he said. 'Where does it end?'
