The chief financial officer of the Mountain State is gearing up for a fight to preserve West Virginia’s embattled school choice program, which was halted just weeks before the start of the school year.

“We got a bunch of out-of-state, high-flying trial attorneys out in New York and California trying to take something away from some of the poorest people in the country,” the state treasurer, Riley Moore, said.

Earlier this month, a judge ruled that the state’s new Hope Scholarship Program violated West Virginia’s constitution and issued a permanent injunction against it. More than 3,000 students had already been approved for the program, which offered parents of each student a savings account of $4,300 to spend on education-related costs.

The judge ruled that the program contradicted the state’s mandate to fund “a thorough and efficient system” of public schools.

The suit was filed by two public school parents and a public school teacher, who argued that halting the program was ​​“absolutely essential to protect the state’s students and their public schools.” They were represented pro bono by a global law firm, Paul Hastings.

The chief litigator for the plaintiffs, Tamerlin Godley, called attacks such as Mr. Moore’s “disingenuous” and noted that the Institute of Justice, which represented the defendants, is based out of Washington, D.C.

As state treasurer, Mr. Moore was slated to serve as the chairman of the scholarship program’s board. He sees the program as “100 percent constitutional.” A native West Virginian, he was elected to the post in 2020, defeating a longtime incumbent, John Perdue. He is the first Republican state treasurer in 92 years. 

Mr. Moore sees the Hope Scholarship Program as a smarter way to spend on education. Per-student, West Virginia spends about $12,000 — most of which is federal funding. 

Under the Hope Scholarship, the state taxpayer contribution (about $4,300) would follow the non-public school students to their educational programs of choice.

“We spend per-capita more on education than most of the states in America, and the educational outcomes have not improved here,” Mr. Moore said. “We have to do something different here to offer these kids an opportunity and a better and brighter future here.”

He believes the Hope Scholarship Program — if implemented — could break a cycle of increasing public school funding in the hopes of better outcomes.

By design, he argues, the program is intended to serve West Virginia’s lower-income families — a claim disputed by the plaintiffs and their counsel. One of the conditions for eligibility is enrollment in a public school the previous academic year.

“This isn’t so much for the affluent family that might be in West Virginia,” Mr. Moore said, adding that those families are already “at a private school if they want.” 

“Of course, we get the people who have come in out-of-state to try to destroy a great program that is really going to lift a lot of people out of poverty,” Mr. Moore said. “Because they want to make a statement that they think that educational choice is a bad thing.”

The counsel for the plaintiffs, however, argues that the program cannot fulfill this purpose on a $4,300 per-student budget — and can only succeed in diverting money from public schools.

“It’s certainly not helping kids in poverty because it can’t,” Ms. Godley said. “It’s not enough money to send them to private school, so it’s really just a subsidy for more affluent families.”

She points to social science research that shows voucher programs appeal to more affluent families who “take the money and take their kids out of public schools,” effectively “siloing kids in poverty.”

Mr. Moore’s office, in conjunction with the state’s attorney general, has filed an appeal for an emergency stay that would allow the program to function in the upcoming academic year. They have also filed an appeal to the state’s intermediate court.

The lawsuit and injunction hinge on whether West Virginia can legally provide for non-public schools according to its state constitution. 

Ms. Godley thinks it “would be very unusual for the court to stay the injunction.”

“If it did, it would put in place the only universal voucher program in the country,” she said. She predicts two more rounds of appeals, leading the case eventually to the state’s supreme court.

“I think, ultimately, we’re going to be successful,” Mr. Moore said. “If we’re not in the intermediate court of appeals, then we’ll go to the state supreme court and I do believe ultimately, we’re going to prevail in this.”