Some opposed to Amendment 2 argue that it is bad because it is open-ended and doesn’t say how voucher systems should work. That’s not the point, however. This amendment is necessary because in December 2022, the Kentucky Supreme Court issued an opinion that said a bill with exactly the kind of specifics the critics of Amendment 2 now want was unconstitutional. See Cameron v. Johnson. That opinion purportedly relied on several constitutional provisions.
The whole point of Amendment 2 isn’t to establish vouchers or school choice, but to overrule, in effect, that opinion. That’s why the amendment refers to several specific constitutional provisions — they are the ones the Supreme Court relied upon in its opinion, so they are exactly the ones that need to be mentioned.
So, if well-meaning folks are telling you that you shouldn’t support Amendment 2 because it’s not specific enough and doesn’t say how vouchers would work, they simply don’t understand the point of the Amendment, which is to reverse a bad opinion and allow the legislature to legislate, just as it does in a host of other areas that no one seems to worry about. Let’s have the debate on the merits, not based on a misunderstanding of what’s happening.
Written by
Tim Kline
