logo
Judge rules on outstanding matters in Utah school choice legal battle — clearing way for appeals

Judge rules on outstanding matters in Utah school choice legal battle — clearing way for appeals

Yahoo13-05-2025
In the ongoing legal battle to decide the fate of the Utah Fits All Scholarship program, a judge Monday ruled on a pair of outstanding issues that were preventing the case from moving on to the expected appeals process.
Last month, 3rd District Judge Laura Scott ruled that the divisive school voucher program currently being utilized by thousands of Utah children was unconstitutional.
In her April 18 decision against the program, Scott said that because the Utah Fits All program is created by the Legislature and a publicly funded educational program, it must satisfy the constitutional requirements applicable to the 'public education system' set forth in the Utah Constitution.
The Legislature, added Scott, does not have the authority 'to circumvent these constitutional requirements by simply declining to 'designate' the program as part of the public education system.'
A few days later, Scott decided the school voucher program could continue pending the expected defendants' appeal before the Utah Supreme Court.
On Monday, Scott ruled on a couple of outstanding 'claims for relief' issued by the lawsuit's group plaintiffs that includes the Utah Education Association and several individuals.
'Given its ruling that the Program is unconstitutional under article X and article XIII of the Utah Constitution, the court concludes that Plaintiffs' Third Claim for Relief and Fourth Claim for Relief are moot,' wrote the judge in her ruling.
However, Scott still opted to formally rule Monday on the two claims that she did not address last month 'for purposes of completeness for appeal.'
In other words, the defendants in the case against the school voucher program — which includes Utah Gov. Spencer Cox and Utah Attorney General Derek Brown — can now move forward with the appeals process.
The two outstanding plaintiff claims focused primarily on the legality of the Utah Fits All Scholarship program being managed and overseen by private entities. Scott dismissed both claims Monday after articulating lengthy legal analysis in her ruling.
'The court concludes that these claims are not independent and/or alternative grounds for declaring the Program unconstitutional,' the judge wrote. 'Accordingly, the court dismisses Plaintiffs' Third and Fourth Claims for Relief.'
The state was sued by the Utah Education Association, along with plaintiffs Kevin Labresh, Terra Cooper, Amy Barton and Carol Lear, in 2023, after the school voucher program was enacted.
The Utah Fits All Scholarship program gives eligible K-12 students up to $8,000 a year for private school tuition and other costs. It went into effect in the fall of 2024.
The teachers union argued the program violated the Utah Constitution because it diverts income tax revenue to fund private schools.
Scott agreed with the union and other plaintiffs in last month's ruling, saying the program violated sections of the state Constitution that require the state to fund a public education system open to every student that is free of charge, and to use state income tax to fund public schools and to support children and people with disabilities.
Proponents of the program argued the program did not affect the state's system of public schools, but was in addition to that constitutional requirement, and that it cleared the bar of using income tax to support children.
Scott's ruling Monday on the two previously outstanding plaintiffs' claims comes days after the state filed an unopposed petition for permission 'to file interlocutory appeal' with the Utah Supreme Court.
The petition revealed the urgency likely shared by both parties to move the case forward through the legal process for final disposition.
'While the district court said it would decide Plaintiffs' third and fourth claims in the near future, the case will still not be final and eligible for direct appeal until the lower court orders relief,' read the petition.
'And no party wants that to happen yet — before this Court can review and decide the merits — given the stakes of enjoining the Program: stopping educational benefits for thousands of Utah children and voiding part of teacher salary raises.'
Scott's ruling Monday essentially addresses the issues raised in the interlocutory appeal, pending a response from the Utah Supreme Court.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

South Korea Weighs Painful Concessions to Avert Trump's Tariffs
South Korea Weighs Painful Concessions to Avert Trump's Tariffs

Bloomberg

time2 hours ago

  • Bloomberg

South Korea Weighs Painful Concessions to Avert Trump's Tariffs

South Korea will hold high-level trade talks with the US on July 25, accelerating efforts to head off sweeping tariffs by weighing politically sensitive concessions that could reshape ties between the two allies. Finance Minister Koo Yoon-cheol and Trade Minister Yeo Han-koo will meet their US counterparts, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, in a so-called '2+2' format in Washington, Koo told reporters Tuesday.

Trump's Treasury Secretary suggests August 1 trade deal deadline doesn't matter one day after Commerce Secretary calls it a ‘hard deadline'
Trump's Treasury Secretary suggests August 1 trade deal deadline doesn't matter one day after Commerce Secretary calls it a ‘hard deadline'

Yahoo

time4 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Trump's Treasury Secretary suggests August 1 trade deal deadline doesn't matter one day after Commerce Secretary calls it a ‘hard deadline'

The Trump administration may be taking a flexible approach to what it previously described as a 'hard deadline' of long-promised tariffs taking effect on August 1. 'The important thing here is the quality of the deal, not the timing of the deals,' Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told CNBC on Monday, arguing the president's tariff threats had created 'maximum leverage as only he can do' for countries to swiftly reach trade deals with the U.S. 'Our trading partners were told that the rates could boomerang back toward the April 2nd levels,' he added. 'We can continue talking then. But again, we're proceeding apace with the negotiations, but we're not going to rush for the sake of doing deals.' Other Trump officials have described the August 1 deadline, when U.S. trading partners could face up to 40 percent tariffs, as a firmer cutoff point. 'That's a hard deadline, so on August 1, the new tariff rates will come in,' Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick told CBS News on Sunday. 'Nothing stops countries from talking to us after August 1, but they're going to start paying the tariffs on August 1.' The Trump administration is focusing more on the 'quality' of trade deals than White House's August 1 tariff deadline, though Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent says U.S. is applying 'maximum leverage' through Trump to secure swift results (REUTERS) The president, for his part, has called the deadline "firm but not 100 percent firm.' Throughout July, the Trump administration has written letters to foreign leaders warning of the coming tariffs, expected to include a 35 percent tariff rate against Canada, a major U.S. trading partner, and a 30 percent rate for the European Union and Mexico. Since being unveiled in April, Trump's 'Liberation Day' tariff agenda has been repeatedly delayed, and the administration has conceded it won't achieve its original promise of 90 trade deals in 90 days. 'There's 200 countries,'' the president said earlier this month. 'You can't talk to all of them.'' The president's hesitancy to fully implement the tariffs has prompted critics of the president to deem the tariff agenda the 'TACO' plan, for 'Trump always chickens out.' The markets 'shrugged' off Trump's move to push back the tariffs to August, Carolyn Kissane, a professor at NYU's School of Professional Studies Center for Global Affairs, told The Independent earlier this month, compared to the initial market plunge when the tariffs were first revealed. 'The pattern is familiar: dramatic declarations, walk-backs, and renewed threats. It's eroded his credibility and resembles the boy who cried wolf,' Kissane added. 'He believes this tactic gives him a unique leverage to negotiate, but it also weakens the threats.'

Trump's Treasury Secretary suggests August 1 trade deal deadline doesn't matter one day after Commerce Secretary calls it a ‘hard deadline'
Trump's Treasury Secretary suggests August 1 trade deal deadline doesn't matter one day after Commerce Secretary calls it a ‘hard deadline'

Yahoo

time4 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Trump's Treasury Secretary suggests August 1 trade deal deadline doesn't matter one day after Commerce Secretary calls it a ‘hard deadline'

The Trump administration may be taking a flexible approach to what it previously described as a 'hard deadline' of long-promised tariffs taking effect on August 1. 'The important thing here is the quality of the deal, not the timing of the deals,' Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told CNBC on Monday, arguing the president's tariff threats had created 'maximum leverage as only he can do' for countries to swiftly reach trade deals with the U.S. 'Our trading partners were told that the rates could boomerang back toward the April 2nd levels,' he added. 'We can continue talking then. But again, we're proceeding apace with the negotiations, but we're not going to rush for the sake of doing deals.' Other Trump officials have described the August 1 deadline, when U.S. trading partners could face up to 40 percent tariffs, as a firmer cutoff point. 'That's a hard deadline, so on August 1, the new tariff rates will come in,' Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick told CBS News on Sunday. 'Nothing stops countries from talking to us after August 1, but they're going to start paying the tariffs on August 1.' The Trump administration is focusing more on the 'quality' of trade deals than White House's August 1 tariff deadline, though Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent says U.S. is applying 'maximum leverage' through Trump to secure swift results (REUTERS) The president, for his part, has called the deadline "firm but not 100 percent firm.' Throughout July, the Trump administration has written letters to foreign leaders warning of the coming tariffs, expected to include a 35 percent tariff rate against Canada, a major U.S. trading partner, and a 30 percent rate for the European Union and Mexico. Since being unveiled in April, Trump's 'Liberation Day' tariff agenda has been repeatedly delayed, and the administration has conceded it won't achieve its original promise of 90 trade deals in 90 days. 'There's 200 countries,'' the president said earlier this month. 'You can't talk to all of them.'' The president's hesitancy to fully implement the tariffs has prompted critics of the president to deem the tariff agenda the 'TACO' plan, for 'Trump always chickens out.' The markets 'shrugged' off Trump's move to push back the tariffs to August, Carolyn Kissane, a professor at NYU's School of Professional Studies Center for Global Affairs, told The Independent earlier this month, compared to the initial market plunge when the tariffs were first revealed. 'The pattern is familiar: dramatic declarations, walk-backs, and renewed threats. It's eroded his credibility and resembles the boy who cried wolf,' Kissane added. 'He believes this tactic gives him a unique leverage to negotiate, but it also weakens the threats.' Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store