State Question 790 on the Oklahoma ballot in 2016 seeks to overturn a provision in the Oklahoma state Constitution called a Blaine Amendment. The impetus for the measure largely resulted from the Oklahoma Blaine Amendment being used as a justification for a 5-year legal battle to deny services and access to state funding for special needs children. The Oklahoma Supreme Court resolved that fight in early 2016 in Oliver v. Hofmeister.
Contents
Blaine Amendment History
After the Blaine Amendment failed to receive the super-majority of necessary votes to be considered for the U.S. Constitution, its advocates at the federal level began to demand states like Oklahoma include it in their Constitutions to be considered for statehood. The amendment arose during a time of strong anti-Catholic sentiment as a way to block funding for Catholic schools, but it has been more recently used in Oklahoma as a justification for a series of lawsuits against the state over a program meant to help provide better services to special needs children. It was also used as the justification for the removal of Oklahoma's Ten Commandment monument. Oklahoma was forced to adopt the Blaine Amendment at its constitutional convention in 1906.For the approval.
Lindsey Nicole Scholarship Program for Children with Disabilities Cases
Question 790 largely arose in response to a series of lawsuits filed against the parents of a special needs child and then against the State Board of Education. Jenks vs. Spry, Kimery vs. Brown, and finally Oliver v. Hofmeister all revolved around the question of whether the state's Lindsey Nicole Scholarship Program for Children with Disabilities, which was created to allow disabled children whose needs could not be adequately met by public schools attend private schools, could be used by children attending qualified schools with a religious affiliation. Two local school districts sued the parents of a special needs child for accepting the scholarship from the state in a lawsuit which was eventually dismissed by the Oklahoma Supreme Court.
National groups then joined the school districts in suing the State Board of Education in a series of suits that again ended up before the Oklahoma Supreme Court, which ruled against the school districts, for the parents of the children with disabilities, and upheld the Scholarship Program. The attention and cost of these suits led a number of state legislators to question the Blaine amendment and introduce the ballot measure.
State Question 790
If the ballot measure passes, service organizations with religious affiliations would be allowed to compete on equal footing for state funds as long as that money was not used for proselytizing.
The language that will appear on the ballot reads:
"This measure would remove Article 2, Section 5 of the Oklahoma Constitution, which prohibits the government from using public money or property for the direct or indirect benefit of any religion or religious institution. Article 2, Section 5 has been interpreted by the Oklahoma court as requiring the removal of a Ten Commandments monument from the grounds of the State Capitol. If this measure repealing Article 2, Section 5 is passed, the government would still be required to comply with the Establishment Clause of the United States Constitution, which is a similar constitutional provision that prevents the government from endorsing a religion or becoming overly involved with religion."
Support and Opposition to Question 790
Question 790 was approved for consideration by a bi-partisan vote (39-5 in the Senate and 65-7 in the House). Neither political party and no statewide or national elected officials in Oklahoma have expressed their opposition to Question 790.
National church-state separation groups have spoken out in opposition to Question 790 on the grounds that allowing religious groups to access state grants could tempt them away from their main mission. The ACLU has opposed Question 790 on the grounds that overturning it could allow the Ten Commandments monument to be returned to the grounds on the state Capitol.
"They were designed to prohibit aid to parochial schools, especially those operated by the Catholic Church in locations with large immigrant populations. More recently, they have been used in attempts to block state funding to faith service providers.