Alabama committee debates making religious release program mandatory for school districts

Representative Terri DeBose, sponsor of House Bill 342, told the House Education Policy Committee that the bill would require school districts to adopt local policies to allow off‑campus religious instruction during the school day, a practice she said the U.S. Supreme Court upheld in a 1952 ruling. “Credits are optional. That will be decided by the school district,” Representative DeBose said, adding that parents must sign authorizations, nonprofit providers must accept liability and provide transportation, instruction must take place off public property and no public funds may be used.

The bill’s sponsor said 12 Alabama districts currently offer a religious release program and that about 4,000 parents across the state have signed petitions asking for the program in districts that do not. “We don’t feel like parents should have to go and fight the school board for a program that’s constitutionally allowed by the U.S. Supreme Court,” DeBose said.

Supporters framed the bill as preserving parental choice and local flexibility. Representative Paschall, who moved a favorable report, said recent amendments preserve local control and allow districts to tailor a schedule that fits each system. Representative Gidley seconded the motion.

Opponents and some committee members raised practical concerns about scheduling, instructional time and local capacity. Representative Gray asked whether the bill would force districts to move programs currently held on campus to off‑campus locations; DeBose replied that the program the bill addresses is off campus and is distinct from other voluntary on‑campus programs. Representative Drummond and Representative Ross highlighted the logistics for elementary schools, noting that walking a single child to an off‑campus location could take significant classroom time. “If you’ve got 30 minutes for recess, a teacher in elementary will actually have to take the time out to walk that one student down before they can even address the other students,” Representative Drummond said.

Committee members also debated whether converting the existing permissive standard (“may”) into a requirement (“shall”) actually preserves local control or compels districts that consciously declined the program to adopt a policy. DeBose said districts retain full discretion to make their policy “as narrow or broad as they want,” and that some systems may choose to offer the program only at the high school level, as the sponsor said Hoover did.

Representative DeBose and others emphasized safeguards in the bill: parental authorization, nonprofit liability and prohibition on public funding. The sponsor said nonprofit providers typically arrange transportation such as buses or shuttles and use volunteers to keep the process moving.

Representative Paschall moved for a favorable report and Representative Gidley seconded. The clerk called the roll; the transcript records several individual votes and reports a final tally of 9 nays and 2 abstentions. The transcript does not include a clear statement in the record that the committee’s favorable report was adopted or defeated; the public record segment ends with the clerk reading the tally and committee members thanking the sponsor.

Why it matters: the bill would change the current permissive posture in many districts to a statutory requirement for districts to adopt a policy enabling off‑campus religious instruction during the school day. Proponents say the measure responds to parents seeking access; critics say it risks eating into instructional time and may impose burdens on smaller districts that lack transportation or scheduling capacity.

The committee moved on to other bills after the roll call. The transcript shows Representative DeBose withdrew to continue work on related items later, and members discussed related implementation questions for districts that might not have the capacity to implement the program.

Votes, motions and next steps cited in the hearing remain part of the committee record and may be revisited in future sessions or after additional amendments.