Illinois Supreme Court Clarifies School Districts’ Transportation Obligations To Nonpublic School Students

Takeaway: Important clarification regarding school districts’ transportation obligations under Section 29-4 of the School Code. The Court confirmed that a school district’s duty to nonpublic school students is generally limited to transportation available along a district’s existing regular bus routes. The School Code does not require districts to modify established routes, create new routes, or provide direct transportation between a student’s home and a nonpublic school merely because the student resides more than 1.5 miles from the school attended, though school districts have the discretion to do so.

In a recent decision, the Illinois Supreme Court found in favor of the Board of Education of East St. Louis School District No. 189 (the “District”) when nonpublic school students and their parents challenged the District’s transportation practices under Section 29-4 of the School Code (105 ILCS 5/29-4). The case addressed whether a school district must alter its existing bus routes to provide transportation for eligible nonpublic school students, or whether its obligation is limited to transportation provided along existing routes. 

At issue in the case was the interpretation of Section 29-4 of the School Code, which provides in relevant part:

The school board of any school district that provides any school bus or conveyance for transporting pupils to and from the public schools shall afford transportation, without cost, for children who attend a charter school or any school other than a public school, who reside at least 1 1/2 miles from the school attended, and who reside on or along the highway constituting the regular route of such public school bus or conveyance, such transportation to extend from some point on the regular route nearest or most easily accessible to their homes to and from the school attended, or to or from a point on such regular route which is nearest or most easily accessible to the school attended by such children.

The plaintiffs, E.W. and A.M., are elementary school students who reside within the District’s boundaries but attended Bowman Catholic Elementary School (“Bowman”), a nonpublic school. Both students reside more than 1.5 miles from Bowman and live along a highway that forms part of one of the District’s regular bus routes. Prior to the 2022-2023 school year, the District transported the plaintiffs and other students attending Bowman via a dedicated route that was tailored to pick up Bowman students near their homes and delivered them to Bowman. With the onset of the bus driver shortage following the COVID-19 pandemic, however, the District changed its practice and eliminated the separate Bowman route. Instead, Bowman students were left to access only existing District routes which, for the plaintiffs, was not convenient.

As a result of the change, plaintiffs sought a determination that the District’s failure to transport students, either on a dedicated Bowman route or on a District route designed to transport Bowman students as conveniently as the District transports its own students, was a violation of Section 29-4. The District argued that its statutory obligation to transport nonpublic school students extended only to transportation provided along its existing bus routes. In other words, school districts only had to design routes for their own students and then allow non-public school students to utilize those routes at points closest to their homes and the nonpublic school.  The plaintiffs countered that the statutory language requiring transportation to “extend from such point on the regular route” meant that the District must accommodate the needs of the nonpublic school students beyond the District’s regular route.

The Illinois Supreme Court entered judgement in favor of the District. Addressing the scope of a local school district’s obligations under Section 29-4, the Court identified the central question as whether the statute limits transportation for eligible nonpublic school students to locations along a school district’s existing regular bus routes or requires districts to alter those routes to accommodate such students. The Court found that the strongest indicator of legislative intent in Section 29-4 was the statute’s use of the term “regular route” in defining the scope of transportation.  The Court observed that the statute identifies both residential and school pick-up and drop-off locations by reference to points along a district’s existing regular route. With respect to the student’s residence, transportation extends from a point on the regular route “nearest or most easily accessible to” the child’s home; with respect to the school, transportation extends to or from a point on that same regular route “nearest or most easily accessible” to the nonpublic school attended.  According to the Court, by tying transportation services to locations on an existing regular route, the legislature demonstrated its intent to limit transportation obligations to those already-established routes.

The Court further provided, however, that nothing within Section 29-4 prohibits school districts from modifying their regular bus routes to take nonpublic school students directly to and from their schools. The Court observed that school districts have the discretion under Section 29-4 to operate separate bus routes “for the benefit of [nonpublic schoolchildren] where the operation of such routes is safer, more economical and more efficient than if such school district were precluded from operating separate regular bus routes,” but that nothing in the statute requires a school district to “go out of its way” to transport nonpublic school students.  

If you have any questions about this ruling or student transportation requirements under the Illinois School Code, please contact a Franczek attorney.