Opponents of ESAs urge Nevada Supreme Court to uphold injunction

Opponents of Nevada’s education savings accounts asked the state Supreme Court on Monday to uphold an injunction blocking implementation of the controversial school choice program.

In a brief filed Monday, parents opposed to the program cited the Republican-backed Education First amendment in the Nevada Constitution that requires state lawmakers to fund public schools before and to the exclusion of any other appropriation.

Senate Bill 302, however, which Gov. Brian Sandoval signed into law last June, allows the state treasurer to divert money from a public school fund and into education savings accounts that parents can use to pay for private school tuition, homeschooling, tutors and more.

In January, Carson City Judge James Wilson sided with opponents and issued a preliminary injunction against the program, and Attorney General Adam Laxalt later appealed to the state’s high court.

“The voucher law is blatantly unconstitutional, and as Judge Wilson found, will harm — not help — Nevada’s public school children,” Sylvia Lazos, policy director for Educate Nevada Now, said in a statement.

Educate Nevada Now, an education reform group backing the SB 302 challenge in Carson City, estimated the program would drain about $20 million from public school districts.

Under SB 302, parents who pull their children out of a public or charter school would have access to about $5,100 in per-pupil state funds to spend on tuition at a private school and other state-approved education services.

According to the brief filed Monday, allowing state funds to flow into private schools would violate a separate constitutional provision that requires the Nevada Legislature to provide for “a uniform system of common schools.”

Private schools, the brief notes, do not adhere to the same nondiscrimination and accountability mandates that the Nevada Legislature requires of public schools.

A spokeswoman for the attorney general’s office confirmed it received the brief and would prepare a reply in the coming weeks.

Earlier this month, the attorney general’s office argued in an opening brief to the Supreme Court that lawmakers intentionally merged funding for public schools and SB 302 and provided a sufficient amount of money for both.

However, the opponents’ brief claims no evidence supports that argument, since the Nevada Legislature could not estimate how many parents would take advantage of the program.

“SB 302 has no funding cap, making it impossible to forecast how much money (the program) will divert from public school appropriations,” the brief reads.

“SB 302 will reduce funding to Nevada public schools, triggering cuts in teachers, support staff and other crucial programs and services,” it adds.

The attorney general’s office has until April 11 to file a response. The Supreme Court later will decide whether to schedule an oral hearing for the appeal.

Contact Neal Morton at nmorton@reviewjournal.com or 702-383-0279. Find him on Twitter: @nealtmorton