By SEAN MURPHY and MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Catholic Church in Oklahoma wants taxpayers to fund an online charter school that “is faithful to the teachings of Jesus Christ.” The Supreme Court could well approve.

St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School would be the nation’s first religious charter school. A ruling from the high court allowing public money to flow directly to a religious school almost certainly would lead to others.

Opponents warn it would blur the separation between church and state, sap money from public schools and possibly upend the rules governing charter schools in almost every state.

The court hears arguments Wednesday in one of the term’s most closely watched cases.

FILE – The Supreme Court is seen on Capitol Hill in Washington, Dec. 17, 2024. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, File)

The case comes to the court amid efforts, mainly in conservative-led states, to insert religion into public schools. Those include a challenged Louisiana requirement that the Ten Commandments be posted in classrooms and a mandate from Oklahoma’s state schools superintendent that the Bible be placed in public school classrooms.

Conservative justices in recent years have delivered a series of decisions allowing public money to be spent at religious institutions, leading liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor to lament that the court “continues to dismantle the wall of separation between church and state that the Framers fought to build.”

The justices are reviewing an Oklahoma Supreme Court decision last year in which a lopsided majority invalidated a state board’s approval of an application filed jointly by two Catholic dioceses in Oklahoma.

A cross sits atop the Archdiocese of Oklahoma City on Thursday, April 17, 2025 in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. (AP Photo/Nick Oxford)

The K-12 online school had planned to start classes for its first 200 enrollees last fall, with part of its mission to evangelize its students in the Catholic faith.

Oklahoma’s high court determined the board’s approval violated the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause, which prohibits the government from making any law “respecting an establishment of religion.”

The state board and the school, backed by an array of Republican-led states and religious and conservative groups, argue that the court decision violates a different part of the First Amendment that protects religious freedom. The Free Exercise Clause has been the basis of the recent Supreme Court decisions.

“A State need not subsidize private education,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in one of those decisions in 2020. “But once a State decides to do so, it cannot disqualify some private schools solely because they are religious.”

The case has divided some of the state’s Republican leaders, with Gov. Kevin Stitt and State Superintendent of Public Instruction Ryan Walters supporting the concept of using public funds for religious schools, while Attorney General Gentner Drummond has opposed the idea and sued to overturn the virtual charter school board’s approval of St. Isidore.

A key issue in the case is whether the school is public or private. Charter schools are deemed public in Oklahoma and the other 45 states and the District of Columbia where they operate.

They are free and open to all. Just under 4 million American schoolchildren, about 8%, are enrolled in charter schools.

“Charter schools no doubt offer important educational innovations, but they bear all the classic indicia of public schools,” lawyers for Drummond wrote in a Supreme Court filing.

Those include that they receive state funding, must abide by antidiscrimination laws and must submit to oversight of curriculum and testing. But the schools also are run by independent boards that are not part of local public school systems.

“Charter schools are called public schools, but they’re totally different entities,” said Nicole Garnett, a University of Notre Dame law professor who is a leading proponent of publicly funded religious charter schools. Other Notre Dame professors are part of the St. Isidore legal team.

If the court finds the school is public, or a “state actor,” it could lead to a ruling against St. Isidore. If instead it determines that the school is private, the court is more likely to see this case as it did the earlier ones in which it found discrimination against religious institutions.

That the court even agreed to take on the issue now might suggest that a majority is inclined to side with St. Isidore.

The Oklahoma court is the only one that has ruled on religious charter schools and only eight justices are hearing the case. Justice Amy Coney Barrett recused herself without explanation. Barrett previously taught law at Notre Dame and is close friends with Garnett.

The current court is very familiar with private and, especially, religious education. Six justices attended Catholic schools as children and almost all the children of the justices go or went to private schools, including some religious ones.

Walters, the state schools superintendent, sees the St. Isidore case as “the next frontier” in school choice for parents. He has been an unabashed critic of the separation of church and state and sought to infuse more religion into public schools.

“I see it very clearly, that there’s been a war on Christianity and our schools have been at the epicenter of that,” said Walters, a former high school history teacher elected in 2022 on a platform of fighting “woke ideology” in public schools and banning certain books from school libraries.

“We’re going to give parents more rights in education than anywhere in the country, and that means a free ability to choose the school of your choice, whether it’s a religious education, whether it’s a charter school, public school, home school, all of the above.”

The idea of using public money to fund religious schools is antithetical to the Constitution, said Rachel Laser, president and CEO of Americans United for Separation of Church and State.

“This is religious public education, fully and directly funded by taxpayers. It’s as abject a violation of religious freedom as they come, because it forces taxpayers to fund the heart of religion, religious education for religion that’s not their own,” Laser said.

A group of Oklahoma parents, faith leaders and a public education nonprofit that also sued to block the school argue that religious charter schools in their state would lead to a drop in funding for rural public schools.

St. Isidore would lead to other religious charter schools, said Erika Wright, a mother whose two school-age children attend a rural school district in Cleveland County. “And all of those schools would be pulling from the same limited pot of money that we have for our current brick-and-mortar schools across the state.”

A decision is expected by early summer.

Murphy reported from Oklahoma City.

By NICOLE WINFIELD, Associated Press

VATICAN CITY (AP) — The Italian cardinal at the heart of the Vatican’s “trial of the century” announced Tuesday he was withdrawing from participating in the upcoming conclave to elect a new pope for “the good of the church,” ending days of drama that had overshadowed the proceedings.

Cardinal Angelo Becciu’ s status has dominated discussions in the days after Pope Francis’ death amid questions about whether he would participate in the conclave to elect Francis’ successor or not.

After his 2020 downfall, Becciu had said he would not participate in any future conclave. But in recent days he had asserted he had a right to enter the Sistine Chapel with other cardinals on May 7.

On Tuesday, the 76-year-old Italian issued a statement through his lawyers that said: “Having at heart the good of the church, which I have served and will continue to serve with fidelity and love, as well as to contribute to the communion and serenity of the conclave, I have decided to obey as I have always done the will of Pope Francis not to enter the conclave while remaining convinced of my innocence.”

Becciu was once an influential Vatican chief of staff who was a leading papal contender himself. But he fell from grace in 2020 when Francis forced him to resign his job as head of the Vatican’s saint-making office and his rights as a cardinal because of allegations of financial misconduct.

Becciu denied wrongdoing but was put on trial in the Vatican criminal court and convicted of finance-related charges in December 2023. He is appealing the conviction and 5 1/2-year prison sentence and had participated in the pre-conclave meetings, including on Monday.

Becciu’s withdrawal doesn’t affect the Vatican’s official statistics about the conclave because internally it never considered him eligible to vote. There remain 135 cardinal electors, though Vatican spokesman Matteo Bruni confirmed Tuesday that two had formally announced they weren’t coming due to health reasons, bringing the number of electors down to 133.

Becciu is under the age limit of 80 and technically eligible to vote, but the Vatican’s official statistics list him as a “non-elector.”

The Vatican document regulating a conclave, known by its Latin name Universi Dominici Gregis, lays out the criteria for electors, making clear that cardinals under 80 have the right to elect the pope, except those who have been “canonically deposed or who with the consent of the Roman Pontiff have renounced the cardinalate.” It adds that after a pope has died, “the College of Cardinals cannot readmit or rehabilitate them.”

There has never been any clarity on what exactly Becciu renounced or how: The one-line statement issued by the Vatican press office on Sept. 24, 2020, said merely that Francis had accepted Becciu’s resignation as prefect of the Congregation for the Causes of Saints “and his rights connected to the cardinalate.” There is no indication he has been sanctioned canonically.

Italian daily Domani reported last week that during the initial pre-conclave discussions, Becciu was presented with two letters signed by Francis before he died saying he should not participate in the conclave. Becciu’s reference to Francis’ will in his statement Tuesday suggests that the letters were the tipping point that convinced him to withdraw from the vote.

Becciu rose to prominence and power under conservative Pope Benedict XVI and is very much affiliated with the conservative Vatican old guard. While he initially became a close adviser to Pope Francis, Becciu’s subsequent downfall at the hands of Francis might suggest he would have voted for someone keen to undo some of Francis’ reforms.

After he forced Becciu’s resignation, Francis visited Becciu on occasions and allowed him to participate in the life of the Vatican. But Francis also changed Vatican law to allow the city state’s criminal tribunal to prosecute him.

Questions, meanwhile, have continued to swirl about the integrity of the trial that convicted Becciu and eight others. During the proceedings, the court heard that Francis intervened on several occasions on behalf of the prosecutors and that the prosecution’s prime witness against Becciu was coached and manipulated by outsiders.

Defense lawyers discovered that the pope had secretly issued four decrees during the investigation to benefit prosecutors, allowing them to conduct intercepts and detain suspects without a judge’s warrant.

Lawyers cried foul, arguing such interference by an absolute monarch in a legal system where the pope exercises supreme legislative, executive and judicial power violated their clients’ fundamental rights and robbed them of a fair trial.

The tribunal rejected their objections, but in recent weeks even more evidence has emerged about the outside manipulation of the witness and apparent collusion with Vatican prosecutors and gendarmes to target Becciu.

The appeal is scheduled to begin in September.

Associated Press religion coverage receives support through the AP’s collaboration with The Conversation US, with funding from Lilly Endowment Inc. The AP is solely responsible for this content.

By JOSH BOAK, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump’s first 100 days back in the White House have been a demolition job — and that’s a point of pride for his administration.

For the Republican administration, the raw numbers on executive actions, deportations, reductions in the federal workforce, increased tariff rates and other issues point toward a renewed America. To Trump’s critics, though, he’s wielding his authority in ways that challenge the Constitution’s separation of powers and pose the risk of triggering a recession.

From executive orders to deportations, some defining numbers from Trump’s first 100 days:

Roughly 140 executive orders

In just 100 days, Trump has nearly matched the number of executive orders that his predecessor, Democrat Joe Biden, signed during the previous four years, 162. Trump, at roughly 140, is essentially moving at a pace not seen since Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s presidency, when the Great Depression necessitated urgent action.

President Donald Trump signs an executive order in the Oval Office of the White House, Monday, Feb. 3, 2025, in Washington. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

But the number alone fails to capture the unprecedented scope of Trump’s actions. Without seeking congressional approval, Trump has used his orders and directives to impose hundreds of billions of dollars annually in new import taxes and reshape the federal bureaucracy by enabling mass layoffs.

John Woolley, a professor at the University of California, Santa Barbara and co-director of the American Presidency Project, sees “very aggressive assertions of presidential authority in all kinds of ways” that are far more audacious than anything done by former presidents. That includes Biden’s student debt forgiveness program and Barack Obama’s decision to allow residency for immigrants who arrived in the country illegally as children.

“None of those had the kind of arbitrary, forceful quality of Trump’s actions,” Woolley said.

145% tariff rate on China

Trump’s tariff agenda has unnerved the global economy. He’s gone after the two biggest U.S. trade partners, Mexico and Canada, with tariffs of as much as 25% for fentanyl trafficking. He’s put import taxes on autos, steel and aluminum. On his April 2 “Liberation Day,” he slapped tariffs on dozens of countries that were so high that the financial markets panicked, causing him to pull back and set a 10% baseline tax on imports instead to allow 90 days of negotiations on trade deals.

Related Articles

Trump marks his first 100 days in office with a rally in Michigan, a state rocked by his tariffs

John M. Crisp: What I wish Rumeysa Ozturk could have learned in the US

Ross Douthat: Why is Trump struggling? His adminstration is too ‘black-pilled’

Trump administration launches race-based discrimination investigations against Harvard Law Review

Bruce Yandle: Trump, like Twain’s cat, jumps from a hot stove

But that pales in comparison to the 145% tariff he placed on China, which prompted China to fight back with a 125% tax on U.S. goods. There are exemptions to the U.S. tariffs for electronics. But inflationary pressures and recession fears are both rising as a trade war between the world’s two largest economies could spiral out of control in dangerous ways.

The U.S. president has said that China has been talking with his administration, but he’s kept his description of the conversations vague. The Chinese government says no trade negotiations of any kind are underway. Trump is banking on the tariffs raising enough revenue for him to cut taxes, even as he simultaneously talks up the prospect of an agreement.

So far, despite the economic risks, the Trump team shows little desire to budge, even as the president claims a deal with China will eventually happen.

“I believe that it’s up to China to de-escalate because they sell five times more to us than we sell to them,” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told CNBC on Monday.

More than 10,000 square miles of Crimea

Trump said during his presidential campaign that he could quickly defuse the Russian-started war in Ukraine. But European allies and others say the U.S president’s statements about how to end the war reflect a troubling affinity for Russian leader Vladimir Putin.

Trump’s peace proposal says that Ukraine must recognize Russian authority over the more than 10,000 square miles (26,000 square kilometers) of the Crimean Peninsula. Ukrainian President Volodymr Zelenskyy rejected the idea out of hand: “There is nothing to talk about — it is our land, the land of the Ukrainian people.”

Vice President JD Vance, right, speaks with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, left, as President Donald Trump listens in the Oval Office at the White House, Friday, Feb. 28, 2025, in Washington. (AP Photo/ Mystyslav Chernov)

The U.S. president is essentially asking Ukraine to surrender any claims to a land mass slightly larger than Maryland. Russia annexed the area in 2014 when Obama was president, and Trump says he’s simply being realistic about its future.

The four meetings that Trump’s envoy, Steve Witkoff, has had with Putin have yet to produce a trustworthy framework for the deal that Trump wants to deliver.

After recent Russian missile attacks on Ukrainian cities and towns, Trump posted on social media that perhaps Putin “doesn’t want to stop the war, he’s just tapping me along.”

Over 2,000 more Palestinians in Gaza dead

Trump was eager to take credit for an “epic ceasefire” agreement in the Israel-Hamas War in order to restart the release of hostages taken in Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, attack. But the ceasefire ended in March, and more than 2,000 Palestinians have died since the temporary truce collapsed. Palestinian officials have put the total number of deaths above 52,200. Food, fuel and medicine have not entered the Gaza Strip for almost 60 days.

Trump said in February that he would remove the Palestinians from the Gaza Strip and relocate them elsewhere, suggesting that the United States could take over the area, level the destroyed buildings and construct a luxurious “Riviera of the Middle East.”

Roughly 280,000 federal job losses

The Department of Government Efficiency, led by tech billionaire and adviser Elon Musk, is dramatically shrinking the government workforce. Across all agencies, there have been about 60,000 firings, including at the IRS, which might make it harder to collect taxes and reduce the budget deficit. Another 75,000 federal workers accepted administration buyout offers. And the Trump administration has floated at least another 145,000 job cuts.

Those estimated job losses don’t include the possible layoffs and hiring freezes at nonprofits, government contractors and universities that had their federal funding frozen by the Trump administration.

The federal government had about 3 million federal employees, including at the U.S. Postal Service, when Trump became president, according to the Labor Department.

139,000 deportations

The Trump administration says it has deported 139,000 people who were in the United States without proper legal authority. Trump’s first months also have produced a sharp drop in crossings at the Southwest border, with Border Patrol tracking 7,181 encounters in March, down from 137,473 the same month last year.

Deportations have occasionally lagged behind Biden’s numbers, but Trump officials reject the comparison as not “apples to apples” because fewer people are crossing the border now.

The administration maintains that it’s getting rid of violent and dangerous criminals. But many migrants who assert their innocence have been deported without due process.

In April, the Supreme Court directed the Trump administration to “facilitate” the return to the U.S. of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, an El Salvador citizen who was deported to his home country. Abrego Garcia had been living in Maryland and had an immigration court order preventing his deportation to his native country over fears he would face persecution from local gangs. So far, Abrego Garcia remains held in a Salvadoran prison.

Trump said last week that he won the presidential election on the promise of deportations and that the courts are interfering with his efforts.

“We’re getting them out, and a judge can say, ‘No, you have to have a trial,’” Trump said. “The trial’s going to take two years, and now we’re going to have a very dangerous country if we’re not allowed to do what we’re entitled to do.”

The post On Latinidad and Solidarity appeared first on The Texas Observer.