The Idaho Supreme Court upheld the state’s new private school tax credit in an opinion released Thursday.

The court sided with the Idaho Legislature and Idaho Tax Commission by ruling that House Bill 93 does not violate the Idaho Constitution.

“Importantly, we have not been asked to weigh in on the wisdom of these new policies, nor could we do so even if we were inclined,” Justice Gregory Moeller wrote in his opinion. “Today, we have only determined that nothing in the Idaho Constitution prohibits the legislature — provided it fulfills its constitutional duty to public education — from using tax credits to assist parents who are financing their children’s education outside of that system.”

HB 93, passed last year, created a tax credit program that uses state dollars to help families pay for private education, homeschooling or tutoring. The program, which allows families to receive up to $5,000 a year, went into effect in January.

It was met with opposition by public school advocates concerned about public money being diverted away from public schools. The Moscow School District is one of nine petitioners represented in a coalition’s lawsuit to limit HB 93. The coalition and the Idaho Legislature made its oral arguments in front of the Idaho Supreme Court on Jan. 23.

The coalition representing the Moscow School District argued subsidizing private education with public money violates the part of the Idaho Constitution that mandates the state maintain “a general, uniform and thorough system of public, free common schools.”

The Idaho Supreme Court disagreed.

Justice Richard Bevan wrote that while the constitution requires the state to fund public education, nothing in its language restricts the legislature from supporting more than one type of education.

Bevan wrote that the constitution “establishes a floor, and not a ceiling.”

Therefore, the coalition opposing HB 93 could not prove the Idaho Legislature and Tax Commission acted outside the limits of its powers.

In a statement to the Daily News, Moscow School District Superintendent Shawn Tiegs said:

“The Idaho Supreme Court has spoken and we respect their decision and the written opinion and concurrence that they issued. The Moscow School District is a small part of a larger, essential and important Idaho constitutional mandate that the Idaho Legislature establish and maintain a general, uniform and thorough system of public education for all and we will continue our amazing work serving all students and families.”

The justices also did not share the coalition’s concerns about public dollars supporting private enterprise, even if private schools choose not to accept certain students.

“The fact that some educational services are provided by private actors who may limit the scope of admission to their schools does not make the educational services less beneficial to the public as a whole,” Bevan wrote.

Bevan also stated the petitioners could not specify how they will be hurt by this legislation, and even if they could, they needed to first seek judgments from the lower courts before addressing the Idaho Supreme Court.