Oklahomans File Lawsuit to Stop State From Sponsoring Nation’s First Religious Public Charter School

by Alan Chen

New York Governor Kathy Hochul has signaled her intention to opt the state into a new federal private school voucher program.

Passed as part of President Donald Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act in July 2025, the federal voucher program — misleadingly named the Education Freedom Tax Credit — diverts public money into private schools. States that opt into the program allow taxpayers to receive dollar-for-dollar credits of up to $1,700 on their federal taxes in return for “donations” to eligible scholarship-granting organizations, or SGOs. These SGOs, in turn, use these funds to cover private school tuition and other educational expenses for a select few students.

Hidden danger

At first glance, Hochul’s intention to participate in the voucher scheme might appear harmless. But the danger lies below the surface.

Under this program, SGOs would siphon public money — funds that the federal government would forego through tax-credit reimbursements — into private schools that aren’t held to the same anti-discrimination or educational standards as public schools. A trail of reports has documented countless instances of racism and discrimination against LGBTQ+ students, students with LGBTQ+ parents, and students with disabilities in private schools. While this voucher scheme masquerades as an attempt to broaden the slate of educational options available to families, it fundamentally works to divert public funds into schools that can by law discriminate.

Constitutional violation

At the same time, many of the private schools that stand to benefit from the voucher scheme have strong religious ties. In Ohio, which opted into the voucher in February 2026, a state comptroller’s audit found that 4 in 5 eligible SGOs exclusively awarded scholarships to religiously affiliated private schools. Participation in this voucher program violates the constitutional principle of church-state separation — a principle that has long prevented taxpayer money from going toward religious activities.

But the stakes of this decision far exceed the bounds of New York’s schools.

Today, our nation has been fractured into states embracing Trump’s push for private school vouchers and states holding the line for public education. While New York has historically rejected vouchers, opting into the program now could signal to other states that participation in this program is acceptable — that the line can be crossed for short-term fiscal gain, or, worse, for electoral favor.

Inherent risk

New York has long been a leader in the resistance to federal overreach — and other states are watching. If Hochul goes through with opting New York into the federal voucher program, she risks normalizing a program that funnels public funds into discriminatory private schools and furthering the ongoing erosion to our nation’s constitutional commitments.

Governor Hochul, as you make your final decision, I urge you to consider what is at stake beyond Albany. Hold the line — for New York’s schools, for the students and families that this program would leave behind, and for the strength of church-state separation in this nation.

P.S. Members of Congress have introduced the Keep Public Funds in Public Schools Act, which would repeal this federal private voucher program. Use AU’s simple online form to urge your representatives to support this important bill, which protects public education and religious freedom.

Alan Chen is a member of Americans United’s Youth Organizing Fellowship program. The views expressed here are his own and do not necessarily represent the views of Americans United.

By The Rev. Charles A. Fredrickson, ELCA

As a pastor, a member of Americans United for Separation of Church and State’s San Antonio Chapter, and a resident of Texas, I was dismayed to hear Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick on June 26 claim that “separation of church and state is not in the Constitution” and urge public officials to stop invoking the principle when addressing potential violations of religious freedom law.

Patrick’s remarks, delivered in the Oval Office in his role as chairman of President Donald Trump’s Religious Liberty Commission, reflect a growing pattern among Christian Nationalist leaders who seek to delegitimize the constitutional framework that protects religious freedom for all Americans. His statement went further than past rhetoric by directly challenging public officials — local, state, and federal — to abandon the long-standing legal doctrine that prevents government from privileging religion or coercing religious practice.

What Dan Patrick gets wrong about the U.S. & Texas Constitutions

While Patrick is correct that the exact phrase “separation of church and state” does not appear verbatim in the U.S. Constitution, the principle is embedded in the First Amendment’s twin religion clauses: no establishment and free exercise. For more than 75 years, the U.S. Supreme Court has affirmed that these clauses work together to create a structural separation that protects religious liberty for everyone — not just the religious majority.

Moreover, as Patrick is an elected official in Texas, he is bound not only by the U.S. Constitution but also by the Texas Constitution, which contains some of the strongest church-state separation language in the country. Article I, Section 6 states:

• “No man shall be compelled to attend, erect or support any place of worship, or to maintain any ministry against his consent.”
• “No human authority ought, in any case whatever, to control or interfere with the rights of conscience in matters of religion.”
• “No preference shall ever be given by law to any religious society or mode of worship.”

These provisions — along with Section 4’s prohibition on religious tests for public office and Section 5’s protection of witnesses regardless of religious belief — form a clear constitutional mandate: Texas may not compel religious participation, interfere with conscience, or prefer one faith over another.

Dan Patrick’s claim that public officials must now “prove” constitutional violations because “the phrase should have no power over people of all faiths ever again in America” is not only legally inaccurate — it is an attempt to chill the lawful responsibilities of public servants nationally and in the State of Texas who are obligated to uphold both federal and state constitutional protections.

Public officials must protect church-state separation

Americans United San Antonio Chapter calls on public officials at every level — school boards, city councils, county governments, and state agencies as well as federal offices — to continue enforcing constitutional boundaries between religion and government. Patrick’s remarks should not deter them from:

• Identifying and addressing violations of the Establishment Clause;
• Protecting students and families from religious coercion in public schools;
• Ensuring government programs do not discriminate or impose religious requirements;
• Upholding the rights of conscience for people of all faiths and none.

As AU’s Vice President for Public Policy Alessandro Terenzoni noted on the blog last week, the Religious Liberty Commission’s draft report has a myriad of deficiencies, including its lack of ideological diversity and its alignment with narrow Christian Nationalist policy goals. Patrick’s remarks underscore the urgency of monitoring the commission’s work and ensuring that “religious liberty” is not weaponized to undermine the very constitutional protections it claims to defend.

Americans urged to submit public comment by July 13

Americans United is encouraging everyone to submit public comments about the vital role church-state separation plays in protecting religious freedom by the commission’s July 13 deadline. AU has provided this online portal that makes commenting quick and easy.

Meanwhile, the Americans United’s San Antonio Chapter will continue to:

• Educate our communities about constitutional religious freedom;
• Expose efforts to distort or dismantle church–state separation.

Dan Patrick’s comments are not merely rhetorical — they are part of a coordinated strategy to erode federal and state constitutional safeguards and pressure public officials into abandoning their duties. Americans United San Antonio rejects this attempt to rewrite history and will continue defending the separation of church and state as the essential condition for genuine religious freedom.

The Rev. Charles A. Fredrickson is a pastor in the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) and a board member of AU’s San Antonio Chapter.

Photo: Religious Liberty Commission Chairman and Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick (center) speaks alongside President Donald Trump and RLC members Dr. Ben Carson (left) and Dr. Phil McGraw during an event in the White House on June 26, 2026, in Washington, D.C. Photo credit: Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

Americans United for Separation of Church and State President and CEO Rachel Laser issued the following statement in response to U.S. Reps. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.) and Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) introducing a new House resolution honoring church-state separation as the nation celebrates its 250th anniversary:

“Americans United for Separation of Church and State applauds Reps. Huffman and Raskin for continuing to champion the fundamental role church-state separation plays in our democracy and in protecting religious freedom for all. As we’ve seen in the run-up to the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, the separation of church and state is under severe attack from religious extremists who want to impose their narrow beliefs on all of us. This House resolution is an important reminder that our country needs a national recommitment to the separation of church and state before it’s too late.”