COLUMBIA, S.C. — The South Carolina Supreme Court has ruled that the Education Scholarship Trust Fund program (ESTF) violates the state's constitution by using public money to fund private school education.
Governor Henry McMaster signed ESTF into law on May 5, 2023, allowing qualifying parents in South Carolina to apply for scholarships worth $6,000 per student to be used to "create a customized, flexible education for their child."
One week before the window for parents to apply for ESTF, the court heard arguments in a suit filed in October 2023 by the SC NAACP, the SC State Education Association and six public school parents asking the court to strike down the law that used public monies to pay for private school education.
At that time, ESTF guidelines stipulated students "currently enrolled in a public charter school, home school students), and students participating in the Educational Credit for Exceptional Needs Children’s Fund program were not eligible for the scholarships. Tuition and fees of "an education service provider" were covered by ESTF.
SC Supreme Court Justice D. Garrison Hill wrote the majority opinion:
"Interestingly, the Act defines 'Eligible school' as 'a South Carolina public school or an independent school that chooses to participate in the program,' except a charter school. But the term 'eligible school' never appears again in the Act. And... the education service provider cannot simply choose to participate; it must be approved by the Department. To be eligible for a scholarship, a student must be a state resident who attended a South Carolina public school during the previous year (or was too young to do so, or received an ESTF scholarship the previous year), and meets certain household income levels.... A parent who chooses to use a scholarship to pay their child's private school tuition is undoubtedly using public funds to provide a direct benefit to the private school.... After we clear away the window dressing, we can see the Act funnels public funds to the direct benefit of private schools. This is what our constitution forbids.”
"No matter how sound or popular a given legislative policy choice may be, it cannot remain law if it is prohibited by the plain words of the higher law—the Constitution,” Hill wrote in closing.
When asked for a comment, Gov. McMaster said:
"The Supreme Court's decision may have devastating consequences for thousands of low-income families who relied on these scholarships for their child's enrollment in school last month. It may also jeopardize the future enrollment of tens of thousands of students in state-funded four-year-old kindergarten programs and state-funded scholarships utilized by students at private colleges and HBCUs. For these reasons, and more, we will request the Court to expeditiously reconsider this decision – so that the children of low-income families may have the opportunity to attend the school that best suits their needs."