## Facts

- Florida enacted the Opportunity Scholarship Program (OSP), providing scholarships for students assigned to public schools graded “F” in at least two of four years.
- Eligible parents could transfer their child to a higher-performing public school or use a state-funded scholarship to pay tuition at a qualifying private school.
- The scholarships used state education funds that otherwise would support the public school system; many participating private schools were religious.
- Parents and organizations challenged the OSP under the Florida Constitution, including Article IX, section 1(a) (education clause) and Article I, section 3 (no-aid provision).
- The circuit court held the OSP unconstitutional; the First District Court of Appeal affirmed on no-aid grounds.
- The Florida Supreme Court accepted jurisdiction in consolidated appeals brought by the Governor, the Attorney General, and intervenor parents supporting the OSP.

## Issues

1. Whether the OSP violates Article IX, section 1(a) of the Florida Constitution by directing public funds to private schools rather than providing for a “uniform, efficient, safe, secure, and high quality system of free public schools.”
2. Whether the OSP violates Article I, section 3 of the Florida Constitution (no-aid provision) by funding tuition at religious private schools.

## Decision

- The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the invalidation of the OSP in a 5–2 decision.
- The Court held the OSP facially unconstitutional under Article IX, section 1(a).
- The Court reasoned that Article IX requires the state to discharge its education duty through a uniform system of free public schools and that the OSP created a publicly funded alternative outside that constitutionally specified system.
- The Court declined to decide the Article I, section 3 claim because the Article IX holding was dispositive.

## Legal Principles

- Article IX, section 1(a) imposes an enforceable constitutional duty on the state to make adequate provision for a “uniform, efficient, safe, secure, and high quality system of free public schools.”
- The constitutionally mandated “system of free public schools” is treated as the mechanism specified for satisfying the state’s education duty; the legislature may not fund a parallel private-school system that is not subject to the same uniformity and accountability requirements.
- A voucher program may violate the education clause where it diverts funds from public schools and finances private schools that are not bound by public-school standards regarding curriculum, admissions, teacher qualifications, and state accountability.
- When one constitutional provision resolves the case, a court may refrain from deciding additional constitutional challenges.

## Conclusion

The Florida Supreme Court invalidated Florida’s Opportunity Scholarship Program because, by funding private-school tuition as an alternative to attendance in public schools, it conflicted with Article IX’s requirement that the state provide education through a uniform system of free public schools, and the Court therefore did not reach the separate no-aid challenge.


Bush v. Holmes, 919 So. 2d 392 (Fla. 2006)