Many support the idea of the first publicly funded religious charter school, and while legal efforts to make it happen have reached the U.S. Supreme Court, a recent deadlock on a decision has both sides optimistic.

According to The Hill, a 4-4 split on a decision to move forward with such an idea left many questions and possibilities, and especially the fact that Justice Amy Coney Barrett recused herself from the case. 

Advocates of the idea believe that Justice Barrett could provide a crucial fifth tie-breaker vote to carve a path forward for the first publicly funded religious school.

After the recent vote, experts believe there's no reason why a second round could be a reality, and Barrett could be critical in deciding the fate of the idea.

What's going on?

The Hill noted:

For months, the fate of St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School in Oklahoma rested with the Supreme Court. The state’s top court had voided the school’s contract as unconstitutional.

When the justices announced in January they would review that ruling, Barrett indicated she wouldn’t be participating.

Notably, Barrett did not provide an explanation for her recusal in this particular case.

Thomas Jipping, a senior legal fellow in the Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at The Heritage Foundation, weighed in on the matter.

He cautioned that it's difficult to determine what could come as far as a future outcome from a second round given that it's not clear which way the eight justices voted.

“Obviously, the outcome here was in part because there were only eight justices. Justice Barrett did not participate here. That might not be the case in a future case, but we don’t know of the of the eight justices who did participate … we don’t know who took what position,” Jipping said.

He added, "There wasn’t a decision, and you can’t infer anything from silence."

"Disappointed"

Nicole Garnett, a professor at Notre Dame Law School, expressed her disappointment in the high court's non-decision.

“I’m obviously disappointed at the result, but the order has no precedential weight,” Garnett said in a statement.

“The question whether barring religious charter schools violates the Constitution remains live, and I remain confident that the Court will eventually rule that it does."

It'll be interesting to see how the high court comes down on this one.