After a series of recent losses, the charter sector in Los Angeles claimed a clear win in June when a California State Superior Court judge struck down a Los Angeles Unified policy banning charters from using classrooms at roughly a third of the city鈥檚 schools.

The policy, which went into effect this year over heated opposition and after a series of contentious board meetings, barred charters from using nearly 346 LAUSD campuses, out of about 1,000. 

Proponents of the rule 鈥� including the majority of the school board 鈥� argued it would protect schools with programs for Black students, low performing 鈥減riority鈥� schools, and community schools with social services.

But the California Charter Schools Association said it unfairly blocked one in five students – those who attend charters 鈥� from using LAUSD鈥檚 schools. CCSA took its opposition to court, arguing that the rule violated a state law to provide charters with classrooms at district campuses.   

The CCSA won, but L.A.鈥檚 charter movement must still confront a potentially hostile LAUSD board and headwinds faced by many schools in L.A. and other big American cities 鈥� including declining enrollment, squeezed budgets and federal government immigration enforcement.

鈥淚t’s a victory, not just for charter schools, but for public school families across the district,鈥� said Keith Dell鈥橝quila, who is vice president, Greater Los Angeles local advocacy for the CCSA.

is just one of several times it has prevailed over LA Unified in court over policy overreach, Dell鈥橝quila said.  

鈥淚t means you cannot privilege one group of students over another simply based off of where, or which model of public school their families have chosen to attend,鈥� he said.  

Still, L.A. County Superior Court Judge Stephen I. Goorvitch upheld portions of the district policy鈥檚 charter colocation policy in his decision, allowing LAUSD to restrict charters from school buildings on the basis of capacity or safety issues.

The ruling still gives LAUSD latitude on where to allow charter schools to operate, a point district officials focused on in their statement on the ruling.

鈥淲e are very pleased with most aspects of the court鈥檚 ruling, which denied all of CCSA鈥檚 contentions aside from two lines in the policy,鈥� reads LAUSD鈥檚 statement, adding: 鈥淐CSA significantly mischaracterizes the plain language of both the policy and 鈥� ruling.鈥�

LAUSD officials said the district has 鈥渃arefully reviewed the court鈥檚 ruling and is evaluating all available options鈥� 鈥� but reps for LA Unified wouldn鈥檛 say if the district would appeal the decision.

鈥淲e remain firmly committed to serving the best interests of all students in our school communities while continuing to meet our legal obligations,鈥� concluded the district鈥檚 statement.

L.A. Unified has 235 charter schools, more than any other U.S. school system. L.A.鈥檚 charter schools outperform the city鈥檚 schools and enroll high numbers of poor students and students of color.

State law gives charter schools across California the right to public school classroom spaces that are 鈥渞easonably equivalent鈥� to those offered to other public schools. 

But charters have waged legal battles against the district for years, just to gain access to classrooms, Dell鈥橝quila said. He hopes CCSA鈥檚 latest win is decisive, but he鈥檚 not confident it will be. 

Charter schools now command a record 22% of the district鈥檚 enrollment, Dell鈥橝quila said, giving them a bigger slice of the city than any other large U.S. district. Charter schools in L.A. are losing students like schools across the U.S., he said, but LA Unified is losing kids faster.

And the district just lost an important legal battle with the charter sector.

Judge Goorvitch concluded in that the LA Unified policy, which the Board of Education approved with a one-vote majority in 2024, 鈥減rioritizes District schools over charter schools and is too vague.鈥�

How the district will respond now is largely up to the board. So far, its members aren鈥檛 talking.

A spokesman for LAUSD Board Member Rocio Rivas, who co-authored the policy, referred a request for comment to LAUSD and declined to make Rivas available for an interview.

LAUSD Board President Scott Schmerelson didn鈥檛 respond to requests for comment on the ruling.

Reps for , the powerful local teachers鈥� union that backed the campaigns of Rivas and Schmerelson, and also supported the colocation policy that was just struck down, also didn鈥檛 respond to requests for comment.

Morgan Polikoff a professor of education at USC Rossier, said the win could put some wind in the sails of the L.A.鈥檚 once mighty-yet-still-massive charter school sector, a national model for charters which has been under fire for years, and yet retains its relevance.

He questioned the need for the policy at a time when LAUSD enrollments have shrunk drastically leaving empty and underused classrooms. Enrollment in LA Unified fell to around 400,000 kids this year, down from a peak of nearly 750,000 students in 2002.

LAUSD Superintendent Alberto Carvalho and board president Schmerelson have each suggested some schools might have to be closed if the trend isn鈥檛 reversed.

Some estimates put the district at about 40% under capacity in terms of building utilization, but LAUSD doesn鈥檛 have an official reckoning.

So why is the district trying to throttle charter schools when it has classroom space to spare? It鈥檚 about money, said Polikoff.

District and charter schools are both funded by the state on a per-pupil basis. Shrinking enrollments mean shrinking school budgets. The district is trying to retain marketshare, he explained.

鈥淭he district had basically walled off about a third of their campuses, sort of ironically, the kinds of campuses serving the students who are most likely to enroll in charter schools, said Polikoff, 鈥淢aybe not ironically, probably intentionally.鈥�

The number of LAUSD schools sharing space with charters has dropped by nearly half in the last seven years, according to documents presented at the LAUSD board鈥檚 charter committee in May.

Enrollment in the district overall is down about 45% from its peak more than two decades ago, Polikoff pointed out,

鈥淚f the policy had had stuck, the district would have had a bit of a guardrail to protect enrollment declines in some of its campuses. And now that isn’t there anymore,鈥� he said.  

鈥淏oth sectors are struggling, right? And that, I think, is a story of demographic trends in the city.鈥�

Falling enrollment means fewer charter schools have to share space with district-run public schools.

This coming school year, 41 LAUSD schools will house an independently run charter school on their campus, down from 72 in 2018. In the 2017鈥�2018 school year LAUSD provided nearly 23,000 seats for charter kids, it鈥檒l provide about 9,000 in-district seats this year.

With fewer kids from charter schools in district schools, and enrollment dropping and empty classrooms growing across LAUSD, there ought to be less conflict now between district and charters, said Yvette King-Berg, executive director of Youth Policy Institute Charter Schools, which enrolls about 850 students across three schools in L.A.

King-Berg, who serves on CCSA鈥檚 board and has four decades of experience working LAUSD and Pasadena schools, said the ruling 鈥渕oves us back to what’s reasonable.鈥� Issues such as declining enrollments, dropping attendance due to immigration enforcement and falling budgets are common to all LAUSD public schools, she said. 

鈥淭axpayers paid for these school buildings, and if all the taxpayers鈥� funds are flowing equally for all kids, we shouldn’t be pushing any group of kids out,鈥� said King-Berg. 鈥淪o it’s my hope that we can find a way now which is a little bit more fair.鈥� 

Correction: An earlier version of this story misidentified the court that struck down Los Angeles Unified鈥檚 policy banning charters from using classrooms. The judge was from the California State Superior Court. The article also incorrectly identified the institution where Yvette King-Berg works. She is the executive director of Youth Policy Institute Charter Schools.

Between 2006 and 2020, 1.4% of schools with a grant from the Charter Schools Program closed, compared to 2.3% of schools without the funding. And within 12 years, schools with a grant were about half as likely to close as those without one. 

But echoing the results of on the program, the Government Accountability Office found that states awarded about $152 million in grants to 638 charter schools that closed or never opened 鈥� representing about 14% of those that received grants.聽

Even so, charter school supporters welcomed the GAO鈥檚 main takeaway.

鈥淭his finding only underscores the need to increase funding for the [Charter Schools Program] so that more charter schools have access to start-up funds and planning grants,鈥� said Nina Rees, president and CEO of the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools. 

The report is the latest to respond to questions from policymakers about the program鈥檚 effectiveness as the Biden administration moves to implement tighter rules for grantees. Charter supporters argue the updated regulations, which seek to create more racially balanced schools and increase transparency, would limit growth. But critics say grant recipients waste taxpayer dollars when they close or never open. asked for both the GAO report and an earlier one from the U.S. Department of Education鈥檚 Office of the Inspector General. 

The Inspector General found that charter operators opened about half of the schools that they promised. Carol Burris, executive director of the Network for Public Education, wrote in an that the report also drew attention to 鈥渟loppy record keeping and weak oversight鈥� of the program.聽

The GAO focused on the sustainability of schools that opened, comparing similar schools that received grants with those that did not. 

It found that the pattern of grant-receiving schools remaining open longer was consistent regardless of grade levels and student poverty and whether the schools were urban, suburban or rural. The results also held true in the three states that received the most funding from the program 鈥� California, Florida and Texas.

California saw a more dramatic spike in schools closing after nine years if they didn鈥檛 receive a grant. Ana Tintocalis, spokeswoman for the California Charter School Association, attributed the difference to additional quality measures that grant recipients must meet to receive funding. 

Increased closure rates, she added, also likely stem from demographic shifts and the high cost of living and working in the state. 

鈥淭he biggest reasons for closures across the state tend to be difficulty securing facilities and low enrollment, which impact our urban schools the most,鈥� she said.

When GAO researchers interviewed officials in seven states, they found financial mismanagement and a lack of community support were also among the top reasons why charter schools close, whether or not they receive a federal grant.

A year ago, the National Association of Charter School Authorizers released highlighting how states have used grant funds to support school districts, mayor鈥檚 offices, nonprofits and other institutions that approve and renew charter school applications. 

Karega Rausch, president and CEO of the organization, said the GAO鈥檚 report reflects鈥渕eaningful changes鈥� in policies since then that have 鈥渓ed to increased accountability.鈥� 

In some cases, that means stopping a planned charter from opening,鈥� he said, and 鈥渃losing an existing charter school that doesn鈥檛 live up to their promises to students, communities and taxpayers.鈥�