The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
North Dakota A.G.: Teacher Training Funds Program Open to Teachers at Private (Including Religious) Schools
From a formal Attorney General opinion (no. 2022-L-07) responding to a query by the North Dakota Education Standards and Practices Board; it is dated Nov. 29, but was just posted on Westlaw:
… [Y]ou ask (1) whether private school teachers who are also mentors may participate in the Teacher Support System, and (2) whether private school teachers who are also mentors may receive grants to participate in the Teacher Support System. Nowhere in the applicable statute or administrative code are non-public school teachers prohibited from participating in the Teacher Support System.
However, the context of your question indicates the key issue underlying these questions is whether Article VIII, Section 5 of the North Dakota Constitution ("the Blaine Amendment") prohibits teachers at sectarian schools from receiving grants from the Teacher Support System. It is my opinion that the Blaine Amendment is not enforceable under United States Supreme Court caselaw, and therefore teachers at sectarian schools may receive grants from the Teacher Support System….
The Blaine Amendment was adopted as Article 152 of the 1889 North Dakota Constitution and provides that "[n]o money raised for the support of the public schools of the state shall be appropriated to or used for the support of any sectarian school." The North Dakota Supreme Court has held "[a] "sectarian institution' is 'an institution affiliated with a particular religious sect or denomination, or under the control or governing influence of such sect or denomination."' Over time, the definition of "sectarian" has broadened to include "relating to" or "supporting a particular religious group and its beliefs." As a result, the Blaine Amendment effectively means "[n]o money raised for the support of the support of the public schools of the state shall be appropriated to or used for the support of any [religious private school]."
The Teacher Support System is a mentoring program for new teachers operated by the North Dakota Education Standards and Practices Board (ESPB). A teacher who holds an initial, two-year license must participate in the Teacher Support System to be eligible to apply for a five-year-renewal license. The legislature appropriated $2,125,764 to the ESPB for the 2021-23 biennium to provide grants to Teacher Support System mentors. The applicable statutes and administrative code do not prohibit private school teachers from participating in the Teacher Support System as either mentors or mentees. Given that participation in the mentor program is a requirement for renewed licensure and the lack of contrary language in statute, it is my opinion that teachers at private schools may participate in the Teach Support System as mentors. Similarly, it is my opinion that teachers at private schools may receive grants for participating in the Teacher Support System.
However, this does not end the inquiry. As noted above, the Blaine Amendment bars appropriated funds and public money from being used to support any sectarian school. On its face, this prohibition would apply to Teacher Support System grants provided to mentors employed by sectarian schools.
However, in two recent decisions, the United States Supreme Court cast doubt on whether Blaine Amendments can be reconciled with the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. In Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia, Inc. v. Comer, the Court held a "law … may not discriminate against 'some or all religious beliefs.' … The Free Exercise Clause protects against laws that 'impose [] special disabilities on the basis of … religious status."' The Blaine Amendment functionally prohibits religious private schools from receiving grants from the Teacher Support System, while teachers at non-religious private schools are allowed to receive the grants. This is precisely the type of disadvantage the Supreme Court concluded may not be imposed on the basis of religious status.
The Supreme Court went even further in Espinoza v. Montana Dept. of Revenue. In that case, the Court held that, because Montana's Blaine Amendment had been applied to discriminate against schools and parents based on the religious character of the school at issue, the amendment was subject to the strictest level of judicial scrutiny. The Court made clear an interest in separating church and State "cannot qualify as compelling in the face of the infringement of free exercise." The Court concluded that "[a] State need not subsidize private education. But once a State decides to do so, it cannot disqualify some private schools solely because they are religious." Recently, the Supreme Court expanded the Espinoza holding in Carson v. Makin. In Carson, the Court held the application of Maine's Blaine Amendment to generally available tuition assistance payments violated the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment. The Court said the Blaine Amendment impermissibly denied public funding to certain private schools solely because the schools are religious.
Here, as in Carson and Espinoza, the state created a mentorship program that is mandatory for licensure renewal. Fairly applied, the Blaine Amendment would permit teachers at public schools and non-religious private schools to receive grants for participating in the mandatory program, while barring teachers at religious private schools from receiving the same grants. Based on Trinity Lutheran, Espinoza, and Carson, the Blaine Amendment cannot be enforced in any situation where doing so would disadvantage a sectarian school as compared to a non-religious private school simply because of the school's sectarian nature. As a result, it is my opinion the United States Supreme Court has barred the state from enforcing its Blaine Amendment.
Based on binding United States Supreme Court caselaw, it is my opinion the Blaine Amendment unconstitutionally disadvantages sectarian schools. As a result, it is my opinion that teachers at all schools, including both non-religious and sectarian private schools, may participate in the Teacher Support Program as mentors, and may receive grants to support their participation….
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Seems like a pretty straightforward application of the precedents. Pity Montana and Maine didn't take that view to start with.
The sad thing is that Maine, historically, let the parents take the state tuition money to religious schools if they so desired. Only recently did they stop allowing that.
It's sad that you think that's sad
Am I missing something, or do these grants go to individual teachers who participate in what is, effectively, a requirement of their continued licensure, rather than to the individual teachers' institutions?
If that is true, I don't see the problem.
My understanding is that the "mentor" teachers are experienced teachers who serve as advisors to first-year teachers. Hence this would be some sort of compensation for the experienced teachers -- my guess (I emphasize guess) is a stipend like coaches get.
This is the key line: "...whether private school teachers who are also mentors may receive grants to participate in the Teacher Support System."[emphasis added]
The other question is that if they are hiring substitute teachers to provide release time for both the mentor and mentee, someone is going to have to pay for that and hence -- perhaps -- the use of the word "grant" rather than "stipend."
See also: https://www.nmu.edu/Webb/ArchivedHTML/UPCED/mentoring/docs/mentor.pdf
The ND State Education website appears to have crashed, but ED claims that ND requires private school teachers to be certified by the state. (This is not true in most states.)
And hence if the newly-certified teachers in the private schools (including the Parochial ones) are going to need a mentoring program in order to retain their state license (and the school retain them teaching) then it makes sense that the grants also go to the private (including Parochial) schools and their mentor teachers.
See: https://www2.ed.gov/about/inits/ed/non-public-education/regulation-map/northdakota.html
NB: ED is the US Department of Education -- DoE was taken by the Department of Energy who got there first.
And they call themselves ED -- I once had a letter where ED wrote to Ed -- it was rather humorous....
I can see how grants to individual teachers can be regarded as not subject to the Blaine Amendment.
I don't see how the Blaine Amendment can be regarded as violating the US Constitution.
I'm unsurprised that the ND A.G. thinks (or says) it does.
See: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1088_dbfi.pdf
Yeah. I know.
But I think that was an obviously incorrect decision.
Yeah but I don't think you can really criticize a lawyer for relying on it!
Maybe, though some used to distinguish between aid to individuals and aid to schools. That's very tenuous in the Maine case, more reasonable here.
Unlike tuition, the subsidy to the teacher does not find its way to the school, except in that it presumably improves teaching quality.
Somebody would have to pay for the mandatory training for teachers at the sectarian schools. The school would typically do that, directly or indirectly (for example, as higher salary to teachers so they can pay for it).
And historically, many schools were just a single teacher. It's hard to square that history with a historical distinction for funding being intended for teacher rather than the school.
Why?
I argue that Climate Change is a religion. As is Social Justice.
And both are proselytized in the PUBLIC schools....
You argue a lot of stupid things.
Don't forget The Great Race Cult.
basic tenets:
Too bad, clinger. Urbane, sophisticated people understand that progress is good and they'll leave you in the past where you belong.
STATES RANKED BY EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT
(includes territories; 42 jurisdictions ranked)
HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA
North Dakota 47
UNDERGRADUATE DEGREE
North Dakota 32
ADVANCED DEGREE
North Dakota 49
Diverting funds to nonsense-teaching schools seems unlikely to improve North Dakota's deplorable educational circumstances.
(If you are a smart, ambitious young person stranded in North Dakota, society provides a lifeline that would enable you to depart North Dakota at high school graduation and pursue education and opportunity elsewhere, in a modern, successful community and/or on a strong, mainstream, liberal-libertarian campus. Get out as soon as you can, and I wish you every bit of luck.)
Also ranks #40 in Afro-Amuricans, admittedly behind those "Klinger" states of Oregon, Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont, Jeez, gotta be pretty awful that even the Afro-Amuricans won't go there. (Lived a few years at Minot AFB ND, which was even worse than it's sister base of Ellsworth AFB SD (USAF had both kinds of Dakota, South and North) Winters worse than Siberia, Mosquitos the size of small birds,
Frank
Many years ago, when I worked for a NASA contractor in Huntsville, I became acquainted with an engineering professor from UND. He was there on some sort of summer research grant.
One day he complained to me that the whole system was a mess. "How is it," he asked, " that I get to spend winter in North Dakota, and summer in Alabama?"
Was he compelled to live or work in North Dakota? Easily avoided, self-inflicted injury. I hope his judgment has improved.
No Jerry, most of us get to chose where we live, but then again, most of us aren't You, Jerry.
But hey (man!) hear they have a great Pepper Steak at https://www.cor.pa.gov/Facilities/StatePrisons/Pages/Greene.aspx
I'll stick with my Klinger Swansons...
Frank
College degrees are increasingly meaningless.
It is more quality of life you look at -- and where are people happier?
Education-disdaining, disaffected right-wing losers are among my favorite culture war casualties.
And a core audience of this blog.
That's like the gazillionth time you said that, Mrs. Sandusky must get sick of it, oh yeah, there is no Mrs. Sandusky.