Politicians across the nation claim they want a world-class education system that ensures every child receives the education they deserve. 

How we get there is the source of debate. Despite spending hundreds of billions of dollars in recent decades on our public education system, we have very little to show. According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the U.S. hovers near the middle of the pack internationally in standardized test scores even as other countries have advanced. One report said, “The U.S. struggled the most in math, where 15-year-olds in 29 other countries had higher average scores than Americans.” 

This is unacceptable. And while there are a variety of reasons for our education stagnation, we believe that one answer is to provide families more choice, including private, religious schools.  

AHEAD OF KEY SUPREME COURT ARGUMENTS, HERE’S WHICH STATES HAVE PASSED SCHOOL CHOICE MEASURES

Parents in Oklahoma have been fighting for more education freedom for decades. One way Oklahoma responded was by expanding access for new and innovative charter schools as alternatives for parents seeking a better education for their children, including offerings such as a French-immersion school.

But Oklahoma’s choice is under attack once again at the United States Supreme Court.  

In Oklahoma, we have been battling two different lawsuits trying to destroy faith-based options for parents to choose. The ACLU, Freedom from Religion Foundation and others filed the first suit. Shockingly, the attorney general of Oklahoma, Gentner Drummond, filed the second.  

The aim of both suits is to prevent the Statewide Charter School Board and our Oklahoma Department of Education from treating St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School the same as every other applicant who applies to be a charter school simply because it is faith-based. The U.S. Supreme Court will soon hear arguments in the case. 

Oklahoma is rural. To ensure parents in rural areas have expanded choices, virtual options are available. We believe in Oklahoma that parents are best positioned to determine the educational needs of their own children and that the Oklahoma Department of Education should give parents as many options as possible to meet a diverse array of needs. Some parents may choose their local school, some parents may choose a brick-and-mortar charter school in their area, some parents may prefer a virtual approach.  

St. Isidore applied to be one of those options. They met all the academic criteria we require in Oklahoma to be a qualified option for parents. However, the ACLU and Attorney General Drummond objected, claiming that the state must discriminate against St. Isidore because it is Catholic.  

Supporters of school choice responded that we are simply trying to expand options for parents, and we are not allowed to violate the Free Exercise Clause of the United States Constitution.   

In fact, we felt bound by prior U.S. Supreme Court decisions prohibiting this kind of religious bigotry in educational choices, including Carson v. Makin, a recent case won by the Institute for Justice and First Liberty Institute against the state of Maine for doing precisely what Drummond is demanding be done here – engaging in religious bigotry against a faith-based educational option. 

The argument, advanced by the ACLU and Drummond, is that religious bigotry is enshrined in the Oklahoma Constitution because it has two provisions that work together to prohibit government resources from aiding a faith-based educational program.  

These provisions are sometimes called “little Blaine Amendments,” because they harken back to efforts by Senator James Blaine from Maine in the late 19th Century to ensure that no public funds would go to Catholic schools but rather would be reserved to the more Protestant-friendly public schools.  

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION  

This effort to ban Catholic schools from receiving any aid is a “doctrine, born of bigotry,” according to Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito. It is this bigotry that the ACLU and Drummond are attempting to continue, and it is this bigotry that we intend to end in Oklahoma. 

For decades, politicians and activists pointed fingers at each other, each trying to blame another for the educational ills of our home state. Almost every solution offered sounds different and promising, but they usually have the same thing in common – they are government-led solutions.  

We are trying to do something different in Oklahoma. We are trying to empower parents to decide for their families and force schools to compete for parents in an open market system. Some parents would like a faith-based option.  

St. Isidore applied to be one of those options. They met all the academic criteria we require in Oklahoma to be a qualified option for parents. However, the ACLU and Attorney General Drummond objected, claiming that the state must discriminate against St. Isidore because it is Catholic.  

Excluding that option in the name of 19th century religious bigotry is just another political agenda driving education policy.  

Instead of fighting against parents and telling them that government officials know what is best for their children, we should instead listen to them. There is hope that the Supreme Court will give us this chance, a chance to take power away from government bureaucrats and give it back to the people.  

Ryan Walters, Oklahoma’s state superintendent of public instruction since 2023, is a former high school history teacher and education reform advocate committed to parental empowerment and conservative policy initiatives in public education. Hiram Sasser is executive general counsel for First Liberty Institute, a nonprofit law firm dedicated to defending religious freedom for all. 

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM HIRAM SASSER 

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM RYAN WALTERS

Texas hospitals were left on the hook for nearly $122 million in health care costs racked up by illegal immigrants for one month last year, the first month the state began tracking the figures.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed an executive order in August mandating the Texas Health and Human Services Commission (THHSC) to track the number of “individuals not lawfully present” in the U.S. who used Texas public hospitals.

The first report, released Friday, shows more than 31,000 hospital visits by illegal immigrants in November alone — costing Texas hospitals $121.8 million.

SKYROCKETING HEALTHCARE COSTS FOR ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS SPARKS BORDER STATE OUTCRY

Abbott’s executive order directed Texas hospitals to provide THHSC with quarterly breakdowns on patients who are not lawfully present in the U.S., including the number of inpatient discharges, emergency department visits and the cost of care provided to these patients. 

Though the $121.8 million incurred represents the month of November 2024, future reports will include full quarterly data, THHSC said. The agency will release its first yearly report of data collected from hospital providers Jan. 1, 2026.

THHSC said that hospital providers inform patients that their immigration status responses do not affect their care, as required by federal law.

Texas, a border state, reported some of the highest crossing numbers ever recorded under the Biden administration, putting immense pressure on its healthcare system, Andrew Mahaleris, Abbott’s press secretary, told Fox News Digital.

A doctor looking at healthcare data on a screen  (Kurt “CyberGuy” Knutsson)

NEWSOM CONCEDES SKYROCKETING HEALTHCARE COSTS FOR ILLEGALS ARE ‘PARTIAL’ CONTRIBUTOR TO MEDICAID PROBLEM

“Many of these illegal immigrants are straining the Texas hospital system, which is why Governor Abbott directed the Texas Health and Human Services Commission to begin assessing the cost of care,” Mahaleris said. 

“Now, Texas has reliable data on the dramatic financial impact that illegal immigration is having on our hospital system.”

Mahaleris praised President Donald Trump’s “swift action” in securing the southern border, noting that illegal crossings have dropped to record lows. 

“Texas is hopeful that [Trump’s] efforts to remove those who entered unlawfully may also cause these healthcare costs to decline.” 

Last week, the Texas House Committee on Public Health heard testimony about a bill by Fort Worth Republican Rep. Mike Olcott’s that would make Abbott’s executive order a law, Fox 26 Houston reported.

A U.S. Border Patrol agent watches over more than 2,000 migrants at a field processing center on December 18, 2023, in Eagle Pass, Texas.  (John Moore/Getty Images)

Meanwhile, the Texas Hospitals Association, the principal advocate for the state’s hospitals and healthcare systems, said that the fact that hospitals are required to collect this data should not be a deterrent for people in need of care.

“With 24/7 life-saving care, hospitals are required by law to treat anyone who comes through the door, regardless of ability to pay, regardless of their demographics,” the association said in a statement.

The fact that hospitals are required to collect this data should not be a deterrent for people in need of care. Hospitals remain open and ready to serve Texans’ acute care needs.”

The U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments on Wednesday in the case of a Catholic charter school in Oklahoma that is seeking the support of public funds.

St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School would be the nation’s first religious charter school, setting a precedent sure to be capitalized on by other religious institutions. Both the Oklahoma Supreme Court and Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond, a Republican, have argued funding the school is unconstitutional. 

Oklahoma Gov. Gov. Kevin Stitt, also a Republican, argues the First Amendment allows funding for the school.

For Wednesday’s Supreme Court hearing, the St. Isidore case has been consolidated with the Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board, another similar case.

Sens. James Lankford, R-Okla., Josh Hawley, R-Mo., Kevin Cramer, R-N.D., Ted Budd, R-N.C., and Ted Cruz, R-Texas, filed an amicus brief to the U.S. Supreme Court supporting the school In the brief, the Republican senators flipped Drummond’s First Amendment argument on the attorney general, arguing Oklahoma violated the First Amendment by denying St. Isidore a charter because it’s a religious school. 

LGBTQ CHRISTIANS CRUSADE AGAINST TRUMP’S RELIGIOUSLY ‘HOSTILE’ POLICIES DURING HOLY WEEK

“It’s no secret that parents want to educate their children in line with their values. And a public good shouldn’t be denied to anyone based on their religion. The outcome of this case will be revolutionary for religious liberty and education freedom, and Oklahoma is at the forefront,” Stitt’s office said in a statement.

100 DAYS OF INJUNCTIONS, TRIALS AND ‘TEFLON DON’: TRUMP SECOND TERM MEETS ITS BIGGEST TESTS IN COURT

The National Alliance for Public Charter Schools, which opposes St. Isidore’s effort, argued the case is a slippery slope that would have a far-reaching impact.

“We strongly believe the Supreme Court should maintain that charter schools are public, which is based on 30 years of law. To allow a religious charter school, the Court would be redefining charter schools as private, thereby putting charter school funding at significant risk and dramatically reducing access to school choice for millions of families across the country,” the organization’s president, Starlee Coleman, told Fox News Digital in a statement.

The Oklahoma Statewide Virtual Charter School Board approved St. Isidore’s contract request in June 2023, allowing them to receive public funds. Lawsuits soon brought the case up to the Oklahoma Supreme Court, which ruled against the school last year.

Gov. Kevin Stitt, R-Okla., (left) and Oklahoma Attorney General Drummond (right) disagree on whether the First Amendment allows the Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board to grant St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Charter School public funding.  (Getty/AP)

The Supreme Court is now reviewing that ruling by Oklahoma’s highest court, which found that funding the school violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, which prohibits the government from making any law “respecting an establishment of religion.”

“Charter schools no doubt offer important educational innovations, but they bear all the classic indicia of public schools,” Drummond argued in SCOTUS filing.

Advocates of the school point to the Free Exercise clause, which has been used in recent Supreme Court rulings to defend public funding going to religious institutions. 

TRUMP ADMINISTRATION ASKS SUPREME COURT TO REVIEW EL SALVADOR DEPORTATION FLIGHT CASE

“A State need not subsidize private education,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue in 2020. “But once a State decides to do so, it cannot disqualify some private schools solely because they are religious.”

U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts (L) and Associate Justices (L-R) Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh stand on the House floor ahead of the annual State of the Union address. (Getty Images)

The amicus brief from GOP lawmakers made a similar argument, claiming the Oklahoma Supreme Court’s ruling was ill-considered.

“Upholding the Oklahoma Charter Schools Act with the included exclusion of religious organizations would set a dangerous precedent, signaling that religious organizations are not welcome in public projects. This would not only violate the First Amendment, but it would also deprive society of the valuable contributions that these organizations make,” the Republican senators wrote. 

Fox News’ Deirdre Heavey contributed to this report