In a decision that is being roundly criticized by conservatives including the governor, the Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday that a Catholic charter school cannot receive state funds due its religious affiliation. Experts say the ruling reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of the Constitution’s guarantee of religious freedom in the First Amendment.

In a 6-2 decision, Justice James R. Winchester wrote that St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School “will evangelize the Catholic faith as part of its school curriculum while sponsored by the State. Enforcing the St. Isidore Contract would create a slippery slope and what the framers’ warned against — the destruction of Oklahomans’ freedom to practice religion without fear of governmental intervention.”

But in her dissenting opinion, Justice Dana Kuehn argued that “[c]ontracting with a private entity that has religious affiliations, by itself, does not establish a state religion, nor does it favor one religion over another.”

Governor Kevin Stitt (R) agreed, stating in a press release that he’s “concerned we’ve sent a troubling message that religious groups are second-class participants in our education system. Charter schools are incredibly popular in Oklahoma — and all we’re saying is: we can’t choose who gets state dollars based on a private entity’s religious status.”

Stitt continued, “Religious freedom is foundational to our values, and today’s decision undermines that freedom and restricts the choices available to Oklahomans. I’m disappointed by AG [Gentner] Drummond’s attack on religious liberty and the school choice movement, but I remain hopeful the U.S. Supreme Court will hear the case and grant St. Isidore the right to establish their school.”

Oklahoma’s Republican attorney general has been at odds with the governor ever since Drummond brought the lawsuit against St. Isidore in October of last year. In a statement following Tuesday’s ruling, Drummond reiterated his original reason for filing the lawsuit, which he claimed would prevent tax dollars from funding specific religions. “The framers of the U.S. Constitution and those who drafted Oklahoma’s Constitution clearly understood how best to protect religious freedom: by preventing the State from sponsoring any religion at all,” he contended. “Now Oklahomans can be assured that our tax dollars will not fund the teachings of Sharia Law or even Satanism.”

In response, Stitt has argued that providing funding for a religious charter school does not amount to “sponsoring” a religion, but merely provides schooling options for parents. “Nobody is forcing kids to go to any religious charter school,” he told The Daily Signal last year. “A charter school is just another option. And if a parent chooses that that’s the best option for their kids, why is the government standing in their way? We believe in religious freedom. We believe in school choice. We believe empowering parents to let them choose where they think the best education is for their kids. So, it’s that simple.”

Following news of the ruling, the Catholic Archdiocese of Oklahoma City issued a statement from Archbishop Paul Coakley and Bishop David Konderla, which read, “Today’s ruling is very disappointing for the hundreds of prospective students and their families from across the state of Oklahoma who desired the educational experience and promise of St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School. We will consider all legal options and remain steadfast in our belief that St. Isidore would have and could still be a valuable asset to students, regardless of socioeconomic, race or faith backgrounds.”

The Archdiocese also told Fox News that it plans to “seek review” from the U.S. Supreme Court on the case. The case’s prospects there seem favorable, as two recent cases in 2020 (Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue) and 2022 (Carson v. Makin) were both decided in favor of religious private schools being able to receive public funds under the Free Exercise Clause of the Constitution.

In comments to The Washington Stand, Meg Kilgannon, senior fellow for Education Studies at Family Research Council, remarked, “This situation is disappointing and in its own way absurd. If parents wish to select for their children a charter school that specializes in STEM classes or the arts, they could have that option. But parents in Oklahoma now cannot choose a charter school that specializes in the formation of virtue in students. Isn’t that discriminatory? Are the citizens of Oklahoma better off now that they are protected from the outrage of more virtuous and faithful children?”