Education groups and disability rights advocates are sparring with the Montana Office of Public Instruction over whether publicly funded savings accounts for private education and services for students with disabilities can remain in effect for the duration of the school year.

The new legal scrabble comes after a state district court judge in Helena ruled that the funding mechanism in the Republican-sponsored 2023 law, House Bill 393, was unconstitutional.

Attorneys for the state have said they intend to appeal that ruling to the Montana Supreme Court. But in the meantime, lawyers for both sides disagree about what should happen to existing Education Savings Accounts (ESAs) for the remainder of the school year. More than 60 students are currently using an ESA account to fund education and other services, according to legal filings. 

On Wednesday, Judge Mike Menahan issued another order staying the entirety of his early December ruling until the case is appealed. That ruling was made in response to a motion by state attorneys and Sen. Sue Vinton, the Billings lawmaker who sponsored the bill when she was in the House. The next day, state OPI officials and Vinton celebrated the court’s ruling, saying the order had allowed the program to remain active until next summer.

“Under the court’s order, the Office of Public Instruction (OPI) will continue administering the ESA program, including processing approved reimbursements and payments, through June 30, 2026,” a Thursday release from the office of Montana Superintendent of Public Instruction Susie Hedalen said. “The stay provides important stability and continuity for participating families and ensures that students, particularly those with special education needs, can continue receiving the educational services that best meet their individual needs without disruption.”

But in subsequent Thursday legal filings, attorneys for the plaintiff groups Disability Rights Montana and Montana Quality Education Coalition argued that Menahan’s order to pause the case was improper and overbroad. The decision came before the judge had heard additional briefings from both sides, attorneys for plaintiffs said. 

The plaintiff groups also said the ruling bypassed a more limited option that all sides had already agreed to — using existing funds to pay off outstanding reimbursement requests for specific families. 

“Unlike a blanket stay, tailored relief serves the public interest by appropriately balancing the needs of schools and ESA participants. Defendants have failed to establish irreparable harm justifying a blanket stay,” the plaintiff’s brief filed Thursday read.

The public education advocates and disability rights group requested that Menahan vacate his order staying his earlier ruling and deny the motion from Vinton and OPI, instead directing both parties to meet and confer about which families still need ESA reimbursements.

“If the Court does not summarily deny the motion, Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court order expedited briefing on their motion to vacate, and order that Defendants respond to Plaintiffs’ motion to vacate by no later than December 31, 2025, and that Plaintiffs file any reply by no later than January 6, 2025,” the plaintiffs said. 

Menahan had not responded to the latest motion as of midday on Friday.