How the Supreme Court Is Reshaping Public Education in 2025

🇺🇸 Nothing says The Fourth of July like the Supreme Court deciding all their cases before summer recess! This year there was a lot of discussion around education. I broke down 4 important cases so you can understand how this will impact your child in school.

Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board v. Drummond (Religious Charter Schools)

What happened?
​Oklahoma’s virtual charter board approved St. Isidore of Seville, a Catholic virtual school, to receive state funding: a first in U.S. history. The state attorney general sued, arguing that using public dollars for religious instruction violated Oklahoma’s constitution and the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause. Read more about it here​

Outcome / what it means:
​The U.S. Supreme Court delivered a 4–4 deadlock, with Justice Barrett recused. That split leaves in place the Oklahoma Supreme Court’s decision blocking St. Isidore, but it doesn’t set a nationwide precedent. This tie reveals how deeply divided the issue is, and it signals that the question of religious charter schools is far from settled. We’re likely to see this case like this again.

Natalie’s Perspective: In my opinion, charter schools should not be religious. Even though they are not the same as public schools, they are funded by public money. Religious institutions already save a ton of money each year by not paying taxes, so I would be disappointed to see religious schools receive tax money knowing our public schools already operate on a shoe string budget.

A.J.T. v. Osseo Area Schools, Independent School District No. 279 (Student Discrimination)

What happened? A student with severe morning seizures couldn't attend school until noon. Her parents asked for night classes or flexible options, but the district refused. When they brought a lawsuit leadership hadn’t been made aware of the issue, so it wasn’t a valid discrimination case.

Outcome / what it means: The court ruled in favor of A.J.T., deciding that students with disabilities don't need to prove a school intended to discriminate in order to bring a claim. This aligns their rights with disability protections in other settings. Read more here.​

Natalie’s Perspective: Intent shouldn’t be the bar. If a student is being excluded, even passively, that's discrimination. Families shouldn't have to prove bad intentions just to get support. We live in an ableist world, and I’d like to see children with disabilities get support from their school as an absolute bare minimum.

I used to teach children after hours that had medical disabilities keeping them from school. My school district funded and organized this. In a day and age where we are worried about chronic absenteeism and children dropping out of high school, districts should be working hand in hand with families to get kids to school!

Mahmoud v. Taylor (LGBTQ+ Books in School)

What happened? In Montgomery County, Maryland, elementary schools introduced several LGBTQ‑inclusive books. Initially, parents could opt their children out, but in March 2023, the Board removed both opt-out options and notifications. A group of parents from diverse religious backgrounds sued, arguing this forced their children to participate in instruction that conflicts with their religious beliefs​

Outcome / what it means: On June 27, 2025, the Supreme Court (6–3) ruled that the Board’s no-opt-out policy likely burdens parents’ free exercise of religion and that they’re entitled to a preliminary injunction reinstating opt-outs and notice.

The case referenced to make this decision? Wisconsin v. Yoder, a case that allowed Amish parents to remove their children from school under the age of 16. Read more here​

Natalie’s Perspective: Religious Freedom and public school will always clash. This will not be the last time we see this issue in the Supreme Court. I’ve covered books with LGBTQ+ themes extensively in my banned book series. These story books tend to be adorable and validating for all family structures. It’s wild to me the case just above this one redefines what discrimination is…but does not apply to LGBTQ+ rights. These children deserve to be seen and appreciated in school too.

Trump v. CASA de Maryland, Inc. (Immigration Status and Public Schools)

What happened? CASA, an immigrant advocacy group, sued over a Trump-era rule requiring states to share immigration status with federal authorities including in public schools. The concern: families pulling their kids from school out of fear.

Outcome / what it means: Not decided yet. If the court sides with Trump, it could undermine protections that keep schools safe and accessible for all kids, regardless of immigration status.

Natalie’s Perspective: No child should be afraid to go to school. Making children fearful of going to school impedes their human right to get an education. Families need to trust that school is a safe, welcoming place.

​

If you appreciate pieces like this, you can buy me a coffee here. Thanks for supporting Primary Focus. 🩷