Split Appeals Court sends Opportunity Scholarship case to three-judge panel | Eastern North Carolina Now | A lawsuit challenging N.C. Opportunity Scholarships will head to a three-judge trial court panel. That move represents a legal win for the state, legislative leaders, and parents defending Opportunity Scholarships.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)
    Publisher's Note: This post appears here courtesy of the Carolina Journal. The author of this post is CJ Staff.

    The N.C. Court of Appeals has ruled, with a split 2-1 vote, that a lawsuit challenging North Carolina's Opportunity Scholarship Program should head to a three-judge trial court panel.

    The ruling announced Tuesday marks a win for the state, legislative leaders, and Opportunity Scholarship defenders. Each of those groups had asked for the case to be transferred from a single Wake County trial judge to the panel.

    State law requires three-judge panels to hear lawsuits that include a "facial" constitutional challenge to a state law. In a facial challenge, there is no way for the law to stand if the plaintiffs win the case.

    Plaintiffs challenging Opportunity Scholarships contend their suit amounts to an "as-applied" challenge that should remain with a single judge. An as-applied challenge focuses on the law's impact on particular plaintiffs.

    "Although Plaintiffs attempt to disguise their complaint as an as-applied challenge, the remedy they seek is to void the statute in its entirety, thereby reaching far beyond their particular circumstance," wrote Judge April Wood in the majority opinion.

    "By arguing the Program is unconstitutional as applied because religious schools may receive funding, Plaintiffs are actually attacking the constitutionality of" the law governing Opportunity Scholarships, Wood explained.

    "Here, there are no particular facts alleged from which a determination of whether the Program is unconstitutional as applied may be made," she wrote. "None of the Plaintiffs alleged they applied for a scholarship under the Program, were unconstitutionally denied enrollment into the Program, or applied to an eligible school under the Program."

    "Plaintiffs' complaint reveals they seek to prove their claims by solely attacking the portion of the Program's schools which have religious characteristics," Wood added. "Plaintiffs fail to allege the pertinent facts relating to their particular circumstances necessary to assert an as-applied challenge. Accordingly, because no Plaintiff has applied for a scholarship under the terms of the Program, it is unclear to this Court what facts, if any, exist to support Plaintiffs' individual claims that the Program as applied to him or her is unconstitutional."

    "The success of Plaintiffs' claims would effectively preclude any enforcement of [the OSP law], because the plain language of the statute expressly allows for private church schools and schools with religious charters to receive funding," Wood wrote. "Since Plaintiffs have failed to plead facts and circumstances sufficient to assert an as-applied challenge, we deem the complaint to be a facial challenge to the statute making transfer to a three-judge panel mandatory."

    Judge Richard Dietz concurred with Wood's decision to send the case to a three-judge panel. Wood and Dietz are both Republicans.

    Judge Toby Hampson, a Democrat, dissented. "To decide at this preliminary stage that Plaintiffs' asserted as-applied constitutional challenge in this case - as a matter of fact and law - can only be a facial constitutional challenge required to be heard by a three-judge-panel is premature and runs counter to the statutory procedure set forth by our General Assembly," he wrote. "By failing to allow this litigation to proceed in normal fashion in our trial courts, the majority acts contrary to the statutory scheme which requires the Superior Court to make the determination of whether and when it is necessary to transfer the matter to a three-judge panel."

    "In doing so, contrary to our Court's precedent, the majority forces Plaintiffs to make a facial constitutional challenge Plaintiffs have not plead and expressly disavow," Hampson added.

    The lead plaintiff in Kelly v. State of N.C. is Tamika Walker Kelly, president of the N.C. Association of Educators. That group, the state affiliate of the National Education Association teachers union, has been a vocal critic of the Opportunity Scholarship Program since its inception.

    More than 20,000 students use Opportunity Scholarships now to attend more than 500 private schools across North Carolina. State lawmakers recently increased both the size of the scholarship and the upper bounds of income eligibility. As of mid-May, the program had received more than 14,700 new applications for 2022-23, according to Parents for Educational Freedom in North Carolina. The program had 16,751 new applications for the 2021-22 school year, with more than 15,000 families renewing scholarships that year.

    The Opportunity Scholarship Program has survived an earlier constitutional challenge. The N.C. Supreme Court ruled, 4-3, in 2015 that the program could proceed.
Go Back


Leave a Guest Comment

Your Name or Alias
Your Email Address ( your email address will not be published)
Enter Your Comment ( no code or urls allowed, text only please )




Colorado psychiatrist warns NC on medical marijuana Carolina Journal, Editorials, Op-Ed & Politics Nearly 300 Teachers and Educators Have Been Arrested In 2022, 3 in NC


HbAD0

Latest Op-Ed & Politics

During a courageous public statement denouncing Adolph Hitler in 2022, President Joe Biden deviated from his prepared remarks and recounted the time he personally faced off against Hitler while working as a lifeguard
The U.S. Military unveiled its new strategic long-range stealth bomber this week, Northrop Grumman’s B-21 Raider, which will serve as the backbone of the future for U.S. air power for decades to come.
Treasurer Folwell, Local Government Commission Praise Turnaround, Hand Keys Back to Town
The majority of COVID-19 deaths are now happening in people who are vaccinated, according to a new analysis.
Democrats have dedicated themselves to finding a new social media platform that will agree to censor damaging stories coming about how they used other social media platforms to censor damaging stories.
Actor James Woods praised Twitter CEO Elon Musk during an interview Friday night, saying that Musk quite possibly “saved America” by releasing internal company documents showing how former employees censored conservatives and a story about President Joe Biden’s son.

HbAD1

If you are hosting Thanksgiving this year, you can expect to pay much more for your feast. Nearly all your favorite ingredients will have increased in price since last year.
Twitter CEO Elon Musk released internal company documents through journalist Matt Taibbi about the company's censorship of the Hunter Biden laptop story during the 2020 presidential election that showed that top officials at the company were in regular contact with Democrats.
As “Drag Queen Story Hour” events sweep the nation, two ministers are exhorting fellow Christian men to bring “Pastor Story Hour” to their local public libraries.
On Monday Nov. 7, U.S. Attorney of the Eastern District of North Carolina federal court Michael Easley announced that an assistant U.S. Attorney, Susan Menzer, would serve as a district election officer (DEO).
Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-GA) has defeated Republican challenger Herschel Walker in Georgia’s 2022 Senate runoff election. DecisionDeskHQ called the race at approximately 9:48 p.m.

HbAD2

Months after becoming Twitter’s deputy general counsel, former top FBI lawyer James Baker appeared to support the social media site’s move to suppress the New York Post’s report on Hunter Biden’s laptop in the run-up to the 2020 presidential election

HbAD3

 
Back to Top