Legal Battle Over Religious Charter Schools in Tennessee

In May 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court faced a significant case regarding religious charter schools, Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board v. Drummond. The Court split 4-4, leaving in place an Oklahoma Supreme Court ruling that prohibits religious charter schools but does not establish a national precedent. This deadlock has set the stage for ongoing litigation concerning the intersection of religious liberty and educational opportunities in the United States.

City Journal

In November 2025, Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti issued an opinion stating that key provisions of the state's charter school law likely violate the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment. Tennessee law mandates that charter schools operate as “nonsectarian [and] nonreligious,” effectively barring religious organizations from participating. Skrmetti argued that this exclusion lacks compelling justification and contradicts recent Supreme Court rulings that prohibit discrimination against entities solely based on their religious character.

City JournalAlternet

The Wilberforce Academy of Knoxville subsequently filed a federal lawsuit challenging this ban. The academy aims to provide a school that integrates high-quality academics with a Christian foundation, while ensuring that no student is required to participate in religious activities. However, under current state law, such a school is disqualified from receiving public support.

City Journal

The legal debate centers on whether charter schools should be classified as public schools, thus subject to state regulations, or as privately run institutions providing a public service. The Manhattan Institute's amicus brief in Drummond contended that merely labeling schools as “public” does not inherently make their operations state actions. Skrmetti's opinion highlights that excluding religious entities from charter programs raises constitutional concerns, as it creates inequities in educational opportunities for families.

City JournalAlternet

Critics argue that while wealthy families can choose private education or relocate for better schools, lower-income families relying on charter schools are restricted to secular options. This disparity raises questions about the fairness of educational choices available to different socioeconomic groups.

City Journal

The ongoing legal battles in Tennessee and Oklahoma reflect a broader national conversation about educational freedom and the role of religion in public education. The Supreme Court's previous rulings, such as in Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue and Carson v. Makin, suggest that states cannot exclude religious providers from public benefits once they choose to subsidize private education.

Alternet

As the Tennessee case progresses, it poses critical questions about whether states can continue to exclude religious schools from public education programs. The outcome could significantly impact the future of educational choice and the rights of religious organizations to participate in publicly funded educational initiatives.

City Journal

• “The essence of the Establishment Clause was: we're not going to pay religious leaders to teach their religion.” — Justice Sonia Sotomayor, U.S. Supreme Court

Alternet

The legal interpretations surrounding the classification of charter schools and the implications of the First Amendment remain contentious. While some sources argue that excluding religious schools violates the Free Exercise Clause, others emphasize the need to maintain the separation of church and state as outlined in the Establishment Clause. The Supreme Court's future decisions will be critical in clarifying these complex legal issues.

Alternet