Voluntary reform or judicial fiat?

This week, Nebraskans who still believe in the value of educational choice find themselves with renewed reason for hope. Despite a well-financed political campaign that helped defeat last year’s school choice referendum, the Legislature is advancing a practical, limited reform that puts parents—rather than bureaucracies—closer to the driver’s seat.

The state’s omnibus budget includes language from LB131, introduced by Sen. Tony Sorrentino of Elkhorn. The amendment would allow families to use Nebraska educational savings plan trust accounts—commonly known as NEST 529 accounts—to help pay for private K-12 tuition, up to $10,000 per year. It’s a modest change, but one that affirms a growing truth: education is no longer one-size-fits-all.

Opposition from the political wing of the Nebraska State Education Association has been fierce. While they succeeded in overturning the Opportunity Scholarships Act in November, they have not persuaded all Nebraskans that our current system is sufficient to meet the needs of today’s families. Parents recognize that traditional public schools, while still essential, cannot always deliver the customization demanded by students with special interests, needs, or learning styles. That’s particularly true in an age of AI-assisted curricula, virtual classrooms, and growing demand for values-based instruction.

Polite Nebraskans, in typical fashion, took an incremental, unobtrusive approach. Rather than slashing public school budgets or creating a divisive charter school system, LB131 relies on tax-incentivized savings accounts that families control. The dollars are not redirected from public schools but are instead used by families who have planned ahead, often at personal financial sacrifice. For many, that’s the Nebraska way—forward-looking, respectful, and self-reliant.

Yet even that careful approach may soon be overtaken by a more sweeping national shift. The U.S. Supreme Court, as signaled in recent oral arguments, appears poised to open the door for religious institutions to participate in public charter school programs. A case out of Oklahoma could set a precedent requiring charter programs to include religious schools if they exist alongside secular ones. If that decision comes down as expected, the ground under the education debate will shift profoundly.

Nebraska, unlike 45 other states, does not currently allow charter schools. If the Court rules in favor of religious inclusion in public charters, pressure may mount here to reconsider that stance. Ironically, the NSEA’s staunch opposition to incremental reforms like LB131 may invite a far more aggressive shift toward a system they fear even more—one that constitutionally requires religious and private school access to public funds.

The choice before Nebraska lawmakers, then, is not between public schools and privatization. It is whether to allow for limited, transparent, and voluntary options like LB131, or to wait until federal courts force open a broader door.

For now, LB131 offers a commonsense compromise that preserves public funding, honors family responsibility, and prepares Nebraska for whatever the Court decides this summer. That should be enough to unite a state that values both tradition and innovation.