Suit Challenging Idaho’s Voucher Subsidy Program Filed with Supreme Court

An alliance of pro-public education organizations and individuals committed to defending Idahoans against unconstitutional overreach today announced a legal challenge to the law created by House Bill 93, which established a voucher subsidy for private education in Idaho.

The suit, filed with the Idaho Supreme Court, asks for a Writ of Prohibition against the State of Idaho’s execution of the new law, which was adopted by the Idaho Legislature and signed by Gov. Brad Little in February of 2025. The suit names the Idaho Tax Commission, which was tasked by lawmakers with implementing the legislation. Hawley Troxell, a prominent Boise-based law firm, represents the coalition in the suit.

Filed on behalf of nine petitioners and announced on Constitution Day, the suit’s argument rests on the words of the Idaho Constitution’s Article IX, Section 1, which mandates the Idaho Legislature “establish and maintain a general, uniform and thorough system of public free common schools.” 

“Interpreting these 14 words will be the task of our Supreme Court,” said Daniel Mooney, president of the Committee to Protect and Preserve the Idaho Constitution, at a joint press conference at the Idaho Statehouse today. “Courts in other states when confronted with similar voucher programs and similar constitutional wording have found such programs invalid. These 14 words are simple, yet profound.”

Mooney’s group is joined in the suit by the Moscow School District; Mormon Women for Ethical Government; the members of the Idaho Education Association; Kristine Anderson, mother of students with special needs in the Madison School District; Jerry Evans, former State Superintendent of Public Instruction from 1979 to 1995; Marta Hernandez, a member of the Idaho Education Association and educator at Burley Junior High in Burley; Idaho Representative Stephanie Jo Mickelsen (R-Idaho Falls); and Alexis Morgan, an Idaho parent.

“Using taxpayer funds, House Bill 93 created a governmental system contrary to the constitution that is not general, uniform, thorough, or free,” said Shawn Tiegs, Superintendent of the Moscow School District, which voted to join the suit at a special meeting of the school board last night. “We support ample and appropriate school choice through public charters and other avenues that also protects the rights of every student to receive a quality public education. We must keep the real choice with students and families — not with a private entity or organization that excludes students at taxpayer expense.”

“I am standing here in defense of public education,” said Alexis Morgan, whose child was refused admittance to a private religious school on religious grounds. “Our constitutional framers knew that public education is vital for Idaho to thrive.”

House Bill 93 established a tax credit voucher that allows Idaho families to claim a refundable tax credit of up to $5,000 per eligible student ($7,500 if that student has a disability) to pay for education expenses outside of the state’s public school system. Gov. Little signed the bill despite vocal outcry from thousands in opposition to it, including more than 32,000 people who called his office urging him to veto it.

“HB 93 is not only unconstitutional, it is unjust,” said Cindy Wilson, the Idaho director of Mormon Women for Ethical Government. “It weakens our public schools, strips resources from the majority of Idaho children, and benefits only a few—at the expense of all. Idaho’s children deserve better. They deserve a strong, unified public school system that serves every student, regardless of zip code, faith tradition, or family income.

The suit challenges the notion that the Legislature is acting within the bounds of the Constitution with the creation of this voucher subsidy. By diverting taxpayer funds to private schools, it is funding a parallel system of private schools outside of the single public school system prescribed by the constitution. A system of taxpayer-funded private schools cannot be “general, uniform and thorough” by its nature. 

Nor can it be “public” when private schools are not open to all, nor are they accountable to taxpayers in open and transparent ways.

“In the end, this isn’t just about schools,” said Paul Stark, executive director of the Idaho Education Association. “It’s about the future we want for Idaho. We want communities where every child — no matter where they live, no matter who they are — has access to a strong, free, public education. That’s what the Idaho Constitution requires. That’s what Idahoans expect.”