The Wyoming Supreme Court has cleared the way for families to use public funds for private schools.

Last month, the court ended an injunction against a 2025 state law that would require states to deposit money from the general fund into education savings accounts that families can use to pay for private school tuition and other educational services. (Applications are currently being accepted.) Although litigation challenging the law continues in the trial court, the high court’s decision clearly states the high court’s view that the law is constitutional.

judgment in Degenfelder v. Wyoming Education Association A state district court found that the July 2025 injunction was an abuse of discretion. The lower court said the law, called the Steamboat Legacy Scholarship Act, likely violates the state constitution’s requirement that the state Legislature “provide for the establishment and maintenance of a complete and uniform system of public instruction.”

But the Wyoming Superior Court sees it differently. The law is careful to ensure that funding for private schools comes from the state’s general fund, rather than funds earmarked for or typically associated with the public school system. When private schools are supported with funds not provided by public schools, their individual support is not governed by the legislature’s constitutional obligation to establish and maintain a “system of public instruction.”

There is no doubt that a legislative decision will be taken regarding this. public School funding is subject to the education clause of the state constitution. degenfelder We ask whether these constitutional rules for funding public schools have any bearing on the allocation of public funds to schools. private school.

The trial court found this question to be easy. The court found that there is “no significant dispute that “allowing public funds to fund private schools” is an aspect of the state’s system for school funding.” Therefore, public funding of private schools must be subject to the same constitutional scrutiny as funding of public schools. As I noted, this argument has received surprising support even in red-state jurisdictions, from the Wyoming trial court as well as the South Carolina Supreme Court.

The Wyoming Supreme Court also thought this was an easy question, but the result was different. Private schools and public schools are different. Here, the court stated that funds used for private school tuition do not affect funds allocated to public schools. Therefore, its individual support is consistent with the legislature’s constitutional duty to establish and maintain a “system of public instruction.” Rather, the court explained that spending on private education is akin to “legislative spending not used for public education,” like spending on police, parks, and prisons.

Considering this attitude, degenfelder The argument is presented as an appeal from a preliminary injunction as to whether the plaintiffs have shown the “personal and special injury” that state law requires in order to issue an injunction. None of the plaintiffs named in this lawsuit used or attempted to use education savings accounts to pay for private school. Instead, they all stuck to their intention to enroll their children in public schools. They can’t be hurt, but degenfelder held by a savings account system funded with funds collected from public schools with no intention of using them; do use. Similarly, organizations made up of public school employees and parents, whose mission is to support public school education, cannot be harmed by programs that support private school education, a separate category of state spending. Funding for the savings account “is sourced from the general fund and has no impact on the school’s funding model or permanent school endowment.”

Degenfelder”‘s position is formalist, focusing on how items in the national budget are named, but it is also pragmatic. Public school endowments have traditional sources and are often distinct from the general fund. Indeed, state legislatures that need to balance their budgets are constantly allocating scarce resources to competing functions. However, all taxes spent are anything Except for public education, which presumably includes all tax expenditures authorized and all tax opportunities foregone, a zero-sum budget robs public schools. Citing the Wyoming school finance case, the trial court argued that “any state action that interferes with the right[to public education]must be scrutinized before it can be said to have passed constitutional deliberation.” But even trial courts did not interpret the text broadly enough to subject all state spending to rigorous scrutiny. It turns out that such a reading goes too far.

However, it may warrant increased legislative oversight of spending, particularly on private schools. One is that because lawmakers have given money to private schools, they may be more likely to allocate less money to public schools. This doesn’t have to be intentional or even conscious. Most obviously, vouchers that encourage private school enrollment reduce public school capacity. This could reduce public school spending and further reduce per-pupil spending. Such an effect would be difficult to confirm as it would be confounded with other factors, both local and national (particularly post-COVID-19 enrollment declines and declining U.S. birth rates). But just because it’s difficult to detect doesn’t mean its effects are illusory. In fact, these confusing issues may exacerbate the impact that private school funding has on public schools.

More broadly, it can be argued that spending on all types of K-12 education has constitutional status because both private and public schools are part of a single education system. There is no doubt that private schools are an economical alternative to public schools and can help states achieve their goals of educating all citizens (including reducing the number of students for whom states must pay tuition fees). In this way of thinking, private schools are part of a single “.”system The Wyoming Legislature (along with other state legislatures) has a constitutional duty to “provide.” If you read this way, there may seem to be some resistance to the word “public,” but public funding for private school education is naturally public, and the term “system” is a broad term.

If this interpretation is correct, it amounts to legislative funding for private schools. teeth Also about public schools. But that creates new problems for whistleblowers. If private schools as well as public schools were part of a single system, perhaps Congress would have the right to fund them.

aaron siger He is the Albert A. Walsh Professor of Real Estate, Land Use, and Property Law at Fordham University School of Law and a professor at the Center for Urban Law at Fordham University School of Law.

Recommended quote: Aaron Saiger School vouchers get green light in WyomingSᴛᴀᴛᴇ Cᴏᴜʀᴛ Rᴇᴘᴏʀᴛ (July 9, 2026), https://statecourtreport.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/school-vouchers-get-green-light-wyoming