Bibles, Budgets, and Blunders: Oklahoma’s Superintendent vs. The US Constitution

By Hannah You 

Imagine walking into a public school classroom and finding not just textbooks and lesson plans but a government-mandated Bible on every desk. What if, instead, it were a Torah? A Quran? The Bhagavad Gita? This is the reality that Oklahoma’s superintendent envisions for its K-12 students—a policy to shift schools away from centers of knowledge and into spaces of religious indoctrination. 

Ryan Walters, Oklahoma Superintendent of Public Instruction, has initiated a mandate to distribute Bibles for teachers to develop public school classroom lesson plans for grades 5 through 12. Approving up to $6 million in taxpayer funds for the leather, Trump-endorsed Bibles, Walters claims that understanding biblical principles is essential for understanding American history and should be in AP Government classrooms as a fundamental document next to the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, and the Bill of Rights. However, his initiative has faced criticism and lawsuits from educators, parents, and religious leaders, who assert that the mandate violates the First Amendment and alienates students of different faiths. 

All in all, Superintendent Walters’ mandate to include Bibles in public schools is an unconstitutional and moral overstep that exploits taxpayer funds in one of the nation’s worst education systems, all while relying on Walters’s baseless, unprovable claims filled with loaded language and personal attacks.

The First Amendment draws a line between church and state, one that has protected these institutions for over two centuries; Walters’ mandate doesn’t just blur that line; it erases it completely. The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment ensures that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion” (US Const. amend. I). In other words, the Constitution mandates that laws cannot be passed that force a religion or religious doctrine upon the public. By making the use of these bibles mandatory in public classroom lessons, Walters creates a state-sponsored requirement for one specific religion to be incorporated into lessons without consideration of any other religious belief. 

Unsurprisingly, this unconstitutional mandate has sparked legal action. In October 2024, 32 Oklahoma parents, teachers, and faith leaders filed a lawsuit against Walters, arguing that the policy infringes on constitutional protections and families’ rights. Erica Wright, president of the Oklahoma Rural Schools Coalition and public school parent who signed the suit, explains that “The lawsuit is really about putting a stop to this unconstitutional mandate that violates the Oklahoma Constitution…as a mother and a devout Christian, that it is solely the responsibility of myself and my husband to make all decisions regarding when and how our children engage with the Bible and its religious teachings” (Humphrey). Wright’s point is that Walters’ Bible mandate encroaches on the Constitution, because under the First Amendment, religious instruction should be a personal family decision, not a state-imposed requirement. Ultimately, what is at stake here is the integrity of constitutional rights, the neutrality of public education, and the right to make personal decisions about religious instruction without government interference.

In response to this lawsuit, Walters counters protesters’ arguments with the claims that “Oklahomans will not be bullied by out-of-state, radical leftists who hate the principles our nation was founded upon…I will never back down to the woke mob, no matter what tactic they use to try to intimidate Oklahomans” (Humphrey). Here, Walters suggests that those who oppose his position are “bullies” and outsiders who have come to antagonize the people of Oklahoma with their “radical” and “woke” views. What Walters fails to recognize is that his reliance on loaded language, hyperbole, and personal affront attacks on those who disagree with him is that he himself lacks a fact-based coherent argument to support his claim that the inclusion of Bibles in public school classrooms does not violate the Establishment clause of the Constitution. Indeed, his contention that those who oppose him “hate the principle our nation founded upon” contradicts the very First Amendment argument of those with whom he disagrees. In plain terms, how can his opponents both “hate the Constitution” and argue that something is against the Constitution?  How can they hate the very thing they want to follow?

 In fact, Walters’ arguments are speculative at best and collapse under the weight of reality, as he continues to defend, “It is not possible for our students to understand American history and culture without understanding the Biblical principles from which they came,” claiming that the removal of the Bible from schools since the 1960s has contributed to educational decline (Humphrey). Firstly, this claim is inherently unprovable—there is no way to confirm that understanding American history is impossible without Biblical teachings. Equally important, to claim that since the removal of the Bible from schools in the 1960s, no scholars have been able to properly interpret American history is irrational and false. Countless constitutional scholars and national leaders have emerged since 1960 who demonstrate a profound understanding of American history and law. Supreme Court justices like Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson—both born post-removal—have shaped the nation’s legal and cultural fabric. Walters’ assertion not only disregards this evidence but also uses unprovable claims with more loaded language and baseless rhetoric. 

Moreover, the $6 million price tag for Walters’ initiative is more than a fiscal choice; it’s a moral one. In a state ranked 49th in K-12 education, with underfunded public schools, overburdened teachers, and 20% of high school students not graduating on time, taxpayers are being exploited to fund a political and religious agenda instead of addressing the pressing needs of Oklahoma’s weak education system (“Oklahoma Rankings”). Furthermore, the chosen edition—the leather-backed, 60 dollars apiece, Trump-endorsed God Bless the U.S.A. Bible—raises concern over what truly is being valued: religion, education, or politics? As Edd Doerr, president of the American Humanist Association, points out, “Public schools serve a uniquely public function: the training of American citizens in an atmosphere free of parochial, divisive, or separatist influence of any sort” (Doerr). In making this comment, Doerr urges us to reflect on the fundamental purpose of public schools: to educate all students in an environment that remains impartial and free from polarizing partisan influences. This matters because Walters’ initiative directly contradicts this principle by imposing a religious and political agenda on public schools, creating a divisive ideology that undermines their role as neutral spaces for education and fosters exclusion rather than unity.

In conclusion, Superintendent Walters’ mandate to introduce Bibles into public schools is both unconstitutional and morally misguided, misusing taxpayer funds for a non-educational agenda while resting on weak arguments and inflammatory language to defend its validity. His mandate to include Bibles in public schools violates the constitutional separation of church and state, exploits taxpayer funds in an already struggling education system, and imposes a narrow religious perspective in an open space. 

Instead of pursuing divisive and legally questionable initiatives, efforts should prioritize increasing funding for public education, supporting teachers, and holding leaders accountable to ensure educational priorities remain focused on fairness, equity, and excellence. While these may appear to be lofty federal goals, meaningful change begins locally and can start with you—by voicing concerns to local representatives, establishing programs or clubs that respect and benefit all students regardless of their beliefs, and engaging in discussions that highlight the importance of neutrality in public institutions. Ensuring a fair, inclusive, and constitutional education system is a fight worth fighting for—a necessary pursuit for the well-being of all students.