Federal Judge Allows Massachusetts School Choice Initiative to Move Forward

Sep 3, 1999

A citizens' initiative petition to lift barriers to school choice legislation in Massachusetts was filed today with the Secretary of the Commonwealth by a diverse group of parents, legislators, and citizens, after a federal judge yesterday issued an injunction permitting the petition to move forward. The “Anti-Aid Amendment” of the Massachusetts constitution currently prohibits school choice measures like scholarships and tax credits. The initiative would amend the constitution to permit--but not require--the legislature to enact such measures.

The judicial order was necessary because another Constitutional provision enacted in 1918 bars citizen petitions that attempt to alter the Anti-Aid Amendment. The Anti-Aid Amendment is the only provision of the Massachusetts Constitution singled out by name and specifically insulated from the ballot initiative process. In March 1998, a group of parents who had a similar initiative petition rejected two years ago by the Attorney General, filed a civil rights law suit in federal court in Boston, challenging this discrimination as a violation of the U.S. Constitution's guarantee of equal protection of the laws.

The injunction signed yesterday will permit the collection of signatures as the case moves forward. Signatures will be collected by Citizens for Better Schools during the next three months throughout Massachusetts.

Eric Treene, litigation director of the Becket Fund, a public interest group in Washington, D.C., that represents the parents in the suit, stated: "This year there are initiative petitions in Massachusetts on a wide variety of controversial issues, ranging from tax reform to abortion. But this petition to open the door for school choice is barred. That’s undemocratic. What’s worse is the reason it is barred: the 1918 measure that blocks it was enacted out of fear that the growing population of immigrants may become unhappy with the establishment's schools. In fact, a New York Times editorial at the time called the measure a 'fine bit of political bigotry.'" He added, "We are pleased that the petition can now go forward as the court challenge continues."

The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty is a bipartisan and interfaith public interest law firm that protects the free expression of all religious traditions.

Relevant Cases

• Wirzburger v. Galvin