Public Money, Private Gates: Religious Discrimination in Voucher-Participating Schools Post-Carson

Abstract

The rapid expansion of school voucher programs and the Carson v. Makin (2022) decision have reshaped the constitutional boundaries between public funding and religious education. By requiring states to include religious schools in publicly funded programs while allowing these schools the ability to claim free exercise protections that limit states' ability to condition their participation on compliance with federal civil rights standards, Carson raises a central question: how do publicly funded religious schools engage with families whose religious identities differ from their own? Existing scholarship focuses on academic outcomes and access, but offers little insight into how exclusion may operate at the earliest stage of admissions. This study examines whether religious private schools respond differently to prospective families based on stated religious identity and whether affirming alignment with school values moderates that response. Using a correspondence audit of 526 religious private schools across Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, and North Carolina, the study sends one of three inquiry messages for parents who identify as Christian, Muslim, and nonreligious, and measures response rates, response timing, and qualitative features of replies. The findings show that Muslim families face significantly lower odds of receiving a response, while nonreligious families encounter more indirect forms of exclusion through delayed responses and reduced access to actionable information. Parents' affirmation of the school's values does not increase the likelihood of response but shapes the tone and openness of communication. These patterns persist across distinct policy environments, indicating that differential engagement is not limited to specific program designs. These results demonstrate that discrimination can operate through informal institutional practices that evade existing civil rights oversight. As voucher programs expand, the absence of regulatory clarity risks allowing public funds to support discriminatory admissions, highlighting the need for federal and state action to enforce civil rights protections for the admissions processes of voucher programs.