Federal Appeals Court Rules California Discriminates Against Religious Families in Special-Education Programs

Washington, D.C. – In a landmark decision, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 3-0 that California’s restriction on special-education funding for religious private schools violates the U.S. Constitution. This decision, authored by Judge Kim Wardlaw and supported by Judges Morgan Christen and Mark Bennett, asserts that the state’s policy unfairly targets religious families and fails the neutrality test required by constitutional standards.

The case, Loffman v. California Department of Education, was brought forward by Orthodox Jewish parents who argued that California’s policy prevented them from placing their children in schools aligned with their religious beliefs. These parents, who adhere to their faith’s educational principles, claim that religious schools offer the best environment for their children with disabilities to learn and grow. For decades, however, California has limited access to state funding for special education only to non-religious private institutions, effectively shutting out religious schools.

The decision has been hailed as a significant victory for religious families in California. Eric Rassbach, vice president and senior counsel at Becket, an organization representing the plaintiffs, called the ruling a “massive win for Jewish families in California.” Rassbach stated, “It was always wrong to cut Jewish kids off from getting disability benefits solely because they want to follow their faith. The court did the right thing by ruling against California’s bald-faced discrimination.”

The ruling spotlights the role of the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), which mandates that children with disabilities receive education tailored to their needs, regardless of where they attend school. Under IDEA, federal funding is provided to states for special education in public schools, but it also allows for this funding to be used at private institutions capable of offering specialized support. California’s policy, however, has excluded religious schools from participating in this funding, placing families who wish to integrate faith with education at a disadvantage.

The Ninth Circuit’s ruling noted that California’s exclusionary approach burdens religious families’ constitutional rights. In its decision, the court cited several recent Supreme Court cases, including Trinity Lutheran, Espinoza, and Carson v. Makin, which have reinforced the need for equal treatment of religious individuals and institutions in government programs.

The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, alongside Teach Coalition, a project of the Orthodox Union advocating for equitable government funding for nonpublic schools, has been at the forefront of this case, working with religious families to challenge California’s long-standing restrictions. Teach Coalition noted that the decision confirms religious parents’ right to seek educational environments that support both their children’s special needs and their faith.

Under the Ninth Circuit's mandate, California now has 90 days to appeal the decision to the Supreme Court. If the ruling stands, it could set a broader precedent, influencing how other states administer public benefits in educational programs and ensuring that religious and non-religious families are granted equal opportunities to choose schools best suited to their children’s needs.

This case marks a turning point in the ongoing national debate over religious rights and educational funding, with potential implications for families of all faiths seeking equal access to public benefits in the future.