Court Allows UFA Scholarship Program to Proceed During Appeal

Good afternoon, UEFA Community! The 3rd District Court Status Conference for the Utah Fits All ruling took place today at 2pm. 

We have extremely good news to share in terms of the program being allowed to move forward. We are pleased and relieved to share this news! The education of the current 10,000 scholarship recipients will not be disrupted! Hopeful families can continue to apply and scholarships can be awarded for the 2025-2026 school year!

Three Key Takeaways

➡️ It was agreed upon by all parties that no order will be issued by the judge regarding the ongoing operation of the program. This means the program can move forward uninterrupted until such time the Supreme Court rules!
➡️ There was a request by the State that the Judge rule on the 3rd and 4th claims of the suit (pg 25–26) so that a separate case cannot be made in the future. Judge Scott only ruled that the UFA scholarship was unconstitutional on the 1st and 2nd claims. It was agreed upon by all parties that she should rule on the others if it is done expeditiously. Judge Scott will rule on these two claims and return her decision by May 15. 
➡️ Following the Judge’s ruling on the 3rd and 4th claims, the State and Interveners, on behalf of the Utah Fits All Scholarship Program, will appeal to the Utah Supreme Court.

Here is more information on the four claims, both those the Judge has ruled upon and those to be ruled upon no later than May 15.

The Utah Education Association (UEA) Four Claims: 

1. UEA argued UFA is inconsistent with Article X of the UT Constitution — requiring free, open, and non-sectarian public schools — in that the UFA scholarship allows non-public schools (which have admission requirements) to receive public funds.
2. The lawsuit claims that UFA redirects income tax revenue earmarked in Article X for public education, higher education, and support for children with disabilities to private schools and services.
3. UEA argued that assigning a private program manager may conflict with Article X in that it grants general control of public education to a private entity whereas the constitution places this responsibility with the State Board of Education.
4. This claim raised concern about the extent to which a private organization is authorized to manage a publicly-funded education program. UEA argued that this delegation of responsibility could be at odds with Article I and Article VI of the UT Constitution.

Read the Claims in depth in the UEA’s request for relief here.

Read our statement HERE.