Northern Lights Keep Shining For Alaska School Kids

IJ struck another blow for educational choice with a mid-summer victory at the Alaska Supreme Court. Students using Alaska’s unique correspondence school program were able to enjoy their 21-hour summer days knowing that their education is secure—for now, at least.

On June 28, 2024, the state high court set off some early fireworks for freedom by overturning a trial court’s decision striking down Alaska’s correspondence school program. This unique approach to choice has long allotted state funds to allow children in remote communities without schools to learn via the mail, including correspondence education from private providers. In 2014, the Alaska Legislature expanded the reach of the program to allow all kids across the state, even those with access to a local public school, to use a correspondence school allotment for tuition at a private school. Earlier this year, a trial court in Anchorage struck down that aspect of the program as a violation of the Alaska Constitution.

The Alaska Supreme Court reversed that plainly wrong decision, but the fight isn’t over. The state high court didn’t rule that families using the allotment for private schools—like IJ client Andrea Moceri and her son—win outright. It just ruled that those families shouldn’t have lost at this stage of litigation. So the fight will return to the trial court this fall.

IJ is often aligned with state governments in defending school choice. But not here. The Alaska attorney general’s office agrees that the trial court was wrong but has taken the position that the aspect of the program that IJ clients use—allowing tuition at private schools—may in fact violate the state Constitution. That means IJ is the only counsel fully defending the freedom of Alaska parents and students under both the Alaska and U.S. Constitutions. 

Arguing before the Alaska Supreme Court, IJ Attorney Kirby Thomas West made two big points. First, the Alaska Constitution allows parents to use allotment money for private school tuition. Second, if the state Constitution requires the state to discriminate against parents who choose private schools (this is the state attorney general’s position), that violates the U.S. Constitution, which protects the right to choose a private school. Alaska doesn’t have to fund private options for education, like correspondence schools, tutoring, or after-school sports. But because it does fund those options, it can’t forbid parents from using that money for private school tuition.

By delivering this one-two constitutional punch, IJ is setting up yet another landmark educational choice case at the U.S. Supreme Court. IJ’s recent choice victories at the nation’s high court have involved discrimination against parents choosing religious private schools. This case will test whether states can discriminate against private schools, religious or secular.

For now, though, we’re focused on the nuts and bolts of winning back at the trial court. There may be cold weather and long nights ahead for the Alaska trial team. But summer will come again next year. We’ll make sure Alaska’s kids can again fish and swim without worrying about whether they can go back to the schools they love.

Jeff Rowes is an IJ senior attorney.