The U.S. Supreme Court's Decision in the Cleveland Voucher Case: Where to from Here? Occasional Paper.

This paper discusses the legal implications of "Zelman v. Simmons-Harris," the Supreme Court ruling on education vouchers. The ruling opens the way for vouchers, as concerns the federal judiciary, but the decision did not abrogate many states' restrictive provisions regarding publicly funded voucher and tax-benefit programs. Nor did the decision prevent a state from imposing reasonable regulations on participating private schools. Some constitutional provisions in a number of states present a formidable bar to providing public funds for private-school attendance. Strong public-school interest groups can be expected to throw up roadblocks. Even where such programs emerge, there will be efforts to ensure comprehensive accountability measures for the expenditure of public money. These measures will frighten off many private schools that pride themselves on their independence from government. Furthermore, considerable uncertainty will remain regarding how vouchers will fare under state constitutional law in many states. A table that classifies states' constitutional orientation toward voucher programs is provided. Regardless of the outcome in the states, the Supreme Court's "Zelman" decision surely will stimulate new interest in school choice, vouchers, and tax credits in legislative arenas across the country. (RJM)