School Choice Lawsuits by State: 2026 Data Tracker

The School Choice Index Editorial Team · Last verified: August 3, 2026 · Dataset version 1.0.0

School choice lawsuits by state are active in 13 states. As of August 3, 2026, we identified 16 unresolved K–12 private-school-choice matters under this tracker's published scope: 12 that primarily challenge a program or funding structure, and 4 brought by schools or families seeking access to a publicly funded education benefit. Appeals, remands, renamed captions and consolidated complaints are counted once.

Here is the finding that changes how the recent rulings should be read:

Since April 2024, five state courts entered an adverse merits ruling against a K–12 private-school-choice program or its funding mechanism. Only South Carolina's final opinion expressly enjoined private-school tuition and fee disbursements. Alaska's lower-court ruling was reversed, Utah entered no injunction, Ohio stayed its judgment, and Montana stayed its judgment through June 30, 2026.

That is why the legal status of a program and its operating status appear in separate fields throughout this tracker. A court can rule against a law without immediately ending payments. A court can also stop implementation without finally deciding whether a law is constitutional.

Download CSV · Download JSON · Download XLSX

---

What school choice lawsuits are active by state in 2026?

Sixteen active matters across 13 states met this tracker's inclusion rule as of August 3, 2026. Arkansas, Tennessee and Vermont each have two separately docketed underlying matters. The other ten states have one each.

"Active" is a methodological category, not a legal term. It means the matter was unresolved on the verification date. It does not mean a program is suspended, that no court has ruled, or that either side is likely to win.

Table 1. Active K–12 private-school-choice litigation by state

Source: The School Choice Index, School Choice Litigation State Tracker v1.0.0. Each row links to its court record, filed pleading, official docket, government litigation report or administering-agency record. Last verified August 3, 2026. Appeals, remands, renamed captions and consolidated complaints are not counted as additional underlying matters.

A narrower filter limited to conventional vouchers, education savings accounts, tax-credit scholarships, correspondence-study allotments and town tuitioning produces 15 matters in 12 states. The difference is Massachusetts, where the dispute concerns publicly funded special-education services for children enrolled in private schools. We publish both counts because the scope question changes the result.

---

School choice lawsuit data at a glance

The 16 active matters do not all sit at the same stage or invoke the same body of law. Four have reached a trial-level merits or post-judgment posture, four are on remand or in preliminary or interlocutory proceedings, seven remain in pleading or early merits stages, and one is at the U.S. Supreme Court petition stage.

Table 2. Active cases by procedural stage

Source: The School Choice Index, School Choice Litigation State Tracker v1.0.0. The procedural groups are mutually exclusive editorial classifications based on the latest verified court posture.

Table 3. Active cases by principal legal regime

Source: The School Choice Index, School Choice Litigation State Tracker v1.0.0. A case can plead claims under more than one body of law; this column records the principal regime driving the tracked dispute.

The 12 validity or funding matters are not all principally state-constitutional cases. Eleven active matters principally turn on state constitutional or state funding law. The separate Arkansas federal case principally invokes federal constitutional law, bringing the federal total to five when combined with the four access cases.

---

If a court rules a school choice program unconstitutional, does the money stop?

Not automatically. The five-decision review below found one final opinion that expressly enjoined the relevant private-school tuition and fee disbursements, one lower-court judgment that was reversed, two trial judgments that did not immediately stop program operation, and one funding judgment stayed through a fixed date during appeal.

Table 4. Five adverse state-court rulings since April 2024

Source: The School Choice Index, School Choice Litigation State Tracker v1.0.0, assembled from the linked court records. Last verified August 3, 2026. "Effect on disbursements" reports what the reviewed orders and official status records establish; it is not a prediction about later payments.

The source record supports a narrower and more reproducible finding:

South Carolina is the only one of the five reviewed adverse rulings whose final opinion expressly enjoined private-school tuition and fee disbursements.

The other four had different procedural paths. Alaska's lower-court ruling was reversed. Utah entered no injunction. Ohio stayed its judgment. Montana stayed its judgment through June 30, 2026, but the public record reviewed for this version did not establish what happened after that date.

Wyoming belongs beside this comparison, but not inside the five-ruling count. A district court preliminarily enjoined the Steamboat Legacy Scholarship ESA before applications had been approved, accounts created or provider payments authorized. The Wyoming Supreme Court reversed that preliminary injunction on May 14, 2026 without deciding whether the program is constitutional. Implementation then resumed.

---

Why can a program keep operating after a court rules against it?

Because a legal holding, an injunction, a stay and an appeal do different work. A judgment may explain why a law is invalid. An injunction tells a party what it must stop doing. A stay can suspend the effect of a judgment. An appellate court can reverse a preliminary order without resolving the final merits.

That separation is not a technical footnote. It controls what families, schools and agencies can do while a case continues.

Table 5. What selected courts actually decided

Source: The linked opinions and orders in the active-case table. Last verified August 3, 2026.

Wyoming shows the distinction cleanly. The state supreme court held that the plaintiffs had not shown the personal, particularized irreparable injury required for preliminary relief. It did not hold that every constitutional challenge to the ESA fails.

Alaska shows a different distinction. The state supreme court rejected a facial invalidation of the entire statutory scheme because lawful applications existed and directed challenges to particular expenditures toward the school districts that approved them. That left room for a narrower case on remand.

Missouri shows a third. The circuit court ruled on standing and sovereign immunity and also addressed the pleaded merits in the alternative. Reporting only the merits discussion would omit two independently dispositive procedural grounds.

---

What does this tracker count, and what does it leave out?

One unresolved underlying trial matter equals one row. An appeal, interlocutory appeal, remand, renamed appellate caption or consolidated related complaint updates the existing row rather than creating a second case, unless a court legally severs it into an independently proceeding matter.

Included: education savings accounts, education freedom accounts, vouchers and scholarships, tax-credit scholarships, town tuitioning, correspondence-study allotments, and disputes over religious or private-school access to an otherwise publicly funded K–12 education benefit.

Excluded: broad public-school adequacy or finance litigation without a direct private-choice claim; charter-only litigation; pre-K-only litigation; ballot, petition and referendum procedure cases; criminal fraud prosecutions; routine vendor or provider-payment litigation; athletics and eligibility disputes; resolved cases; and duplicate appellate proceedings.

Table 6. Matters deliberately excluded from the active headline count

Source: The School Choice Index scope-exclusion log, with linked records where publicly available. Last verified August 3, 2026.

The Florida payment dispute involving participating private schools is a useful example. A dispute about how quickly a program administrator pays participating schools may be important, but it is not the same kind of case as a lawsuit asking a court to invalidate a scholarship law or admit an excluded school. Combining them would produce a count with no stable meaning.

---

How did we build the school choice lawsuits by state dataset?

We reviewed all 50 states and the District of Columbia for unresolved litigation directly affecting state-authorized K–12 private-school-choice funding or participation, then applied the same inclusion and deduplication rule to every jurisdiction. Every active row carries a source trail and an August 3, 2026 verification date.

Source hierarchy

We used sources in this order when available:

1. Official court opinion or order
2. Official court docket
3. Filed complaint, amended complaint or brief
4. Government litigation report
5. Administering-agency program page for operating status
6. Counsel or party case page for procedural corroboration
7. Reputable reporting when an official docket was not publicly accessible

How allegations were separated from findings

A complaint's constitutional assertions remain allegations unless a court adopts them. When this page says a court "held," "ruled" or "ordered" something, the linked order or opinion supports that description. Preliminary orders, trial-level judgments and final appellate dispositions are recorded separately.

How operating status was recorded

Whether a program was operating on the verification date is independent from whether a court ruled for or against it. The tracker therefore maintains separate fields for:

• Court posture
• Merits status
• Injunction or stay
• Program operating status
• Date of the latest verified action

Fields deliberately constrained

Three points remain deliberately narrow:

• Missouri: an appeal was announced, but this version does not publish an appellate docket number because it was not independently confirmed.
• Montana: operation was confirmed through June 30, 2026; this version does not assert a later operating status.
• Zero-count states: "no active matter identified under this scope and date" does not mean no lawsuit of any kind exists.

---

How many states have active school choice lawsuits?

Thirteen states had at least one active matter under the broader scope on August 3, 2026; twelve did under the narrower conventional-program filter. The broader thirteen are Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Maine, Massachusetts, Missouri, Montana, Ohio, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont and Wyoming.

Table 7. All 50 states and the District of Columbia

Source: The School Choice Index 51-jurisdiction review. A zero means no active matter was identified under the published scope as of August 3, 2026; it does not establish that no differently scoped or newly filed lawsuit exists.

---

Which cases have final rulings, and which are still pending?

None of the 16 active rows had reached a final, unappealable end as of August 3, 2026. Four had trial-level merits or post-judgment rulings, four were on remand or in preliminary or interlocutory proceedings, seven remained in pleading or early merits stages, and one had a pending certiorari petition.

Trial-level merits or post-judgment matters

• Missouri: judgment for the defendants on procedural and alternative merits grounds; appeal announced.
• Montana: funding mechanism invalidated; appeal pending.
• Ohio: program invalidated at trial; judgment stayed; appeal pending.
• Utah: summary judgment against the program; no injunction; appeal pending.

Remand, preliminary relief or interlocutory matters

• Alaska: remand after reversal of the facial ruling.
• Maine: mixed preliminary-relief decision and remand.
• Mid Vermont Christian: preliminary-relief appeal while the underlying case continues.
• Wyoming: preliminary injunction reversed; merits remain unresolved on remand.

Pleading, motion practice or early merits matters

The two Arkansas matters, Florida, the two Tennessee matters, Texas and Caspers in Vermont had not reached a final merits judgment.

U.S. Supreme Court petition stage

The Massachusetts petition was docketed as No. 26-97 on July 21, 2026. A response was due August 20, 2026. The Court had not acted on the petition by the verification date.

This is why "won," "lost" and "ruled constitutional" are often too blunt. The same case can contain a procedural ruling, a preliminary order, an alternative merits holding, a stay and an unresolved appeal at the same time.

---

What constitutional provisions do school choice lawsuits invoke?

The active dataset divides 11 to 5 by principal legal regime: 11 matters principally turn on state constitutional or state funding law, and 5 principally turn on federal constitutional law. That is a different breakdown from the 12-to-4 validity/access split because the Arkansas federal case challenges a program's funding under federal law.

Table 8. Recurring legal categories in the active dataset

Source: The complaints, opinions and orders linked in Table 1. The categories identify the principal tracked theory and do not claim that a pleading contains only one cause of action.

Threshold doctrines matter as much as the constitutional text. Standing, sovereign immunity, intervention, facial-versus-as-applied framing and irreparable injury have controlled important rulings in Arkansas, Alaska, Missouri and Wyoming.

---

Why did Alaska and South Carolina reach different results under similar direct-benefit language?

Both cases involved state constitutional restrictions on public funds for the direct benefit of private educational institutions, but the courts were deciding different kinds of challenges on different records. South Carolina reached the challenged tuition and fee disbursements in an original-jurisdiction case. Alaska reviewed a facial challenge to the whole correspondence-allotment statute and found lawful applications of that scheme.

In Eidson, the South Carolina Supreme Court held that the tuition and fee provisions provided a prohibited direct benefit to private educational institutions, severed those provisions and enjoined the relevant disbursements.

In Alaska, the supreme court held that the correspondence statutes could be used lawfully for books, materials and other approved educational expenses. It therefore reversed the facial invalidation and said a challenge to a particular expenditure should be directed at the school district that approved it.

The comparison does not prove that procedure always matters more than constitutional text. It shows why the label "direct-benefit clause" cannot predict an outcome by itself. The challenged transaction, the requested remedy, the parties before the court and the facial or as-applied posture all matter.

---

What are the four religious or private-school access cases about?

The four access cases do not ask courts to abolish the underlying benefit. They ask whether a school or family may be excluded, or what conditions the state may attach to participation. The four are Maine, Massachusetts, Texas and Mid Vermont Christian Academy in Vermont.

Maine

The First Circuit issued a mixed preliminary decision on July 2, 2026. It directed preliminary relief against Maine's Religious Expression Rule, affirmed other parts of the district court's decision and remanded. That is not a final judgment invalidating every participation condition.

Massachusetts

The First Circuit affirmed the challenged service-location rule on March 20, 2026. Petitioners filed for certiorari on July 20, and the Supreme Court docketed the case as No. 26-97 the next day. The benefit is publicly funded special-education services; the dispute is where those services may be delivered to children attending private schools.

Texas

The federal case alleges religious discrimination in the implementation of the state's ESA. A March 17 temporary restraining order extended the application deadline. A further extension was denied March 31, and one related plaintiff was dismissed April 9. The merits remain unresolved.

Vermont

Mid Vermont Christian Academy challenges participation conditions under federal constitutional law. The district court's May 12 preliminary-relief order is on appeal, and the underlying merits have not reached a final judgment.

Together, these cases test the line between equal access to a public benefit and the conditions a state may impose on participating providers.

---

What is the U.S. Supreme Court reviewing in St. Mary Catholic Parish v. Roy?

The Supreme Court granted review in the Colorado universal-preschool case on April 20, 2026, limited to the first two questions presented. The case is outside this tracker because it concerns pre-K rather than K–12, but its treatment of Free Exercise and provider-participation conditions may affect how lower courts analyze similar K–12 disputes.

The petition also asked the Court to overrule Employment Division v. Smith. The Court did not grant that third question. The official order says review is limited to Questions 1 and 2.

As of August 3, 2026:

• The case was docketed as No. 25-581.
• Petitioners filed their merits brief on June 25.
• Respondents' merits brief was due August 17.
• No oral-argument date was listed.

View the official Supreme Court docket.

---

What could change this tracker next?

The next version should change only when a source-verified event changes a row, count, classification or operating status. The most important open checks are:

1. Ohio: any Tenth District opinion after the May 12, 2026 argument.
2. Utah: any Utah Supreme Court opinion or stay order.
3. Massachusetts: the response and disposition of Supreme Court docket 26-97.
4. Montana: a verified post–June 30 operating status and any Montana Supreme Court order.
5. Texas: any order resolving preliminary relief or the merits after consolidation.
6. St. Mary: completion of merits briefing, argument scheduling and eventual decision.
7. New filings: any complaint meeting the same scope in a zero-count state.

The full 51-jurisdiction sweep is scheduled for monthly review. Matters with a pending appellate opinion, preliminary-injunction decision or Supreme Court action receive a weekly docket check.

---

What this data shows—and what it does not show

The dataset shows which matters met a disclosed scope and remained unresolved on a specified date. It does not predict outcomes, establish that a complaint's allegations are true, prove that no differently scoped lawsuit exists in a zero-count state, or replace legal advice.

Specific limits:

• Court dockets can change immediately after verification.
• Some state trial courts provide limited public docket access.
• "Active" is this dataset's category, not a legal term of art.
• The dispute class records the central tracked dispute, not every pleaded count.
• A preliminary ruling is not a final merits judgment.
• A trial judgment under appeal is not the same as a final, unappealable resolution.
• A denial of certiorari would not express agreement with the court below.
• Program operating status can change independently from legal posture.
• This version does not claim a post–June 30 operating status for Montana or an independently confirmed Missouri appellate docket.
• A zero means no matter was identified under this scope and date, not that no lawsuit exists.
• This is educational legal-status reporting, not legal advice. A person with a case-specific question should use the official program record and consult a licensed attorney in the relevant jurisdiction.

---

Frequently asked questions about school choice lawsuits

These answers keep current litigation status, program operation and final legal holdings separate. They are related, but they are not interchangeable.

How many states have active school choice lawsuits?

Thirteen states had 16 active matters as of August 3, 2026 under the broader published scope. Under the narrower conventional-program filter, the count is 15 matters in 12 states.

Which states have had an adverse court ruling against a school choice program since April 2024?

The five-state review covers Alaska, South Carolina, Utah, Ohio and Montana. The outcomes were not the same: Alaska's lower-court ruling was reversed; South Carolina entered a final injunction against tuition and fee disbursements; Utah and Ohio continued during appeal; and Montana's judgment was stayed through June 30, 2026.

If a court rules against a voucher or ESA, does funding stop?

Not automatically. The answer depends on the remedy, any injunction, a stay, appellate action and the administering agency's implementation. Table 4 records those facts separately for the five reviewed adverse rulings.

Are school vouchers constitutional in every state?

There is no single national answer. Federal constitutional decisions govern some forms of religious exclusion, while state constitutions contain different education, appropriation and direct-benefit provisions. Program design and procedural posture also differ from case to case.

Is a preliminary injunction the same as a final ruling?

No. A preliminary injunction governs what happens while a case proceeds. Wyoming's injunction was reversed without a final decision on the program's constitutionality.

Does an appeal automatically stop a voucher or ESA program?

No. An appeal alone does not answer whether a program operates. The controlling facts may include the trial judgment, an injunction, a stay, an appellate order and agency implementation.

Why are charter-school cases excluded?

Charter schools are public schools and raise a different set of legal and administrative questions. Charter-only litigation is outside this K–12 private-school-choice scope. A mixed case such as Florida's Spar is included because it directly challenges private-school scholarship programs as well.

How often is this tracker updated?

The complete dataset is scheduled for monthly reverification, with weekly docket checks for matters awaiting an appellate opinion, preliminary-relief ruling or Supreme Court action. The date at the top changes only after a new verification pass.

---

How to cite this page

The information below is neutral attribution information so that the exact page and dataset version can be identified.

The School Choice Index Editorial Team. "School Choice Lawsuits by State:
2026 Data Tracker." The School Choice Index. Dataset version 1.0.0.
Last verified August 3, 2026.
https://theschoolchoiceindex.com/research/school-choice-lawsuits-by-state/

Dataset: The School Choice Index Editorial Team. School Choice Litigation
State Tracker, version 1.0.0. August 3, 2026.

---

Dataset downloads

Download CSV · Download JSON · Download XLSX

• CSV: the 16-row active-case ledger.
• JSON: the active case records, methodology metadata, headline findings and scope rules.
• XLSX: the active cases, 51-jurisdiction summary, adverse-rulings table, procedural snapshot, scope exclusions, claim ledger and source list.

---

Version history

---

Primary sources and case records

The active-case table links each row to its principal record and current-status source. The central records used for the cross-case analysis are:

• Alaska: court case record and March 2026 attorney-general report.
• Arkansas: December 2025 appellate update, federal court record and amended federal complaint.
• Florida: filed complaint and Leon County high-profile case page.
• Maine: First Circuit opinion in No. 24-1739.
• Massachusetts: First Circuit opinion in No. 25-1417 and U.S. Supreme Court docket 26-97.
• Missouri: April 14, 2026 circuit-court judgment.
• Montana: Montana Supreme Court filing for DA 26-0179.
• Ohio: June 24, 2025 trial judgment.
• Tennessee: Young complaint, July 2026 intervention order and Bichell second amended complaint.
• Texas: public case materials and consolidated docket listing.
• Utah: appellate filing.
• Vermont: Caspers first amended complaint, district-court record in Mid Vermont Christian and Second Circuit filing.
• Wyoming: Wyoming Supreme Court opinion, 2026 WY 54 and official ESA program page.
• South Carolina: Eidson opinion.
• U.S. Supreme Court: St. Mary Catholic Parish v. Roy, No. 25-581.

---

Related research

• School Choice Statistics 2026
• Education Savings Account Statistics 2026
• Education Savings Account Audit Reports by State
• Percentage of School Voucher Funds Going to Religious Schools by State
• School Voucher Payments by Private School
• School Voucher Tuition Gap by State
• Editorial standards and methodology

---

The School Choice Index Research desk is an independent, non-partisan research and reference resource. We do not take a position on whether school choice programs should exist. Last verified: August 3, 2026.