Colorado lawmakers created a universal preschool program that would allow parents to choose from a broad array of private providers. The Colorado Department of Early Childhood then disqualified Catholic schools from participating in the program because of their religious beliefs about sexual orientation and gender identity. St. Mary Catholic Parish in Littleton, together with other Catholic preschool providers, sued in federal court, arguing in relevant part that Colorado was unlawfully discriminating against them based on their religious exercise. The district court held that the Department cannot accommodate religious views on sexual orientation and gender identity because those issues relate to health and safety, and the Catholic plaintiffs appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.  EdChoice Legal Advocates filed an amicus brief in support of the appeal to advance education pluralism in universal choice programs.  The brief argues that excluding Catholic schools based on their religious observance is unlawful discrimination and that excluding Catholic schools also undermines opportunities for LGBTQ families by forcing them to compete with Catholic families for the limited number of approved preschool options.

Michigan lacks a school choice program because the Michigan Constitution has a clause prohibiting all aid to private schools. Michigan parents sued, asserting that the constitutional provision should be prohibited from causing special harm to their parental rights. EdLA’s amicus makes two arguments in support of the parents. First, EdLA explains how Michigan’s no-aid clauses regarding private schools are enforced in a discriminatory manner against parents. Second, EdLA compiles evidence demonstrating real harm to students’ education from prohibiting school choice programs.

To ensure students with special needs receive a quality education, Montana lawmakers created a special needs education savings account program in 2023 to provide families the opportunity to access needed supports such as tuition, curriculum, transportation, therapies, and more. Before the program could launch, opponents sued trying to stop it. EdChoice Legal Advocates stepped in to represent lawmaker and mother Sue Vinton, who sponsored the legislation after being inspired by the success of her now-adult son, Jake, who has Down Syndrome.

On July 10, 2024, Judge Mike Menahan of the Montana First Judicial District, Lewis and Clark County, has denied a request to stop the program, which went into effect July 1, 2024. The ruling means that qualifying families of students with special needs may continue submitting claims to the Montana Office of Public Instruction for covered educational costs payable from their ESAs.

Montana lawmakers created Community Choice Schools, which are a type of charter school that has regulatory flexibility like charter schools in other states. Opponents of school choice sued, arguing in relevant part that exempting Choice Schools from certain public school laws and creating a statewide commission for authorizing Choice Schools illegally undermined the authority of the state’s Board of Public Education. EdChoice Legal Advocates partnered with the Frontier Institute, Montana Family Foundation, and Mountain States Policy Center to file an amicus brief in defense of Choice Schools. The brief explained how regulatory flexibility and a statewide authorizing agency are constitutional under Montana law, are consistent with charter school laws in other states, and support quality school options for parents.