Released Time Education Act
Senate Bill 92, the Released Time Education Act, would authorize local public school governing bodies in North Carolina to adopt policies allowing students to leave school during the instructional day to attend courses in religious moral instruction provided by outside sponsoring entities. The bill sets a minimum and maximum time allowance of one to five hours per week, requires written parental consent, and places transportation and liability responsibilities on the sponsoring entity, parent, guardian, or student rather than the public school system.
The bill also allows, but does not require, local school governing bodies to award up to two elective credits for successful completion of a released time course. Any credit decision must be based on secular criteria such as instructional hours, syllabus, assessment methods, and instructor qualifications, and may not consider religious content or denominational affiliation. Students participating in these courses would not be marked absent, and failure to earn credit for participation could not be recorded as a failing grade on the transcript.
If enacted, the bill would amend Chapter 115C of the North Carolina General Statutes by adding a new part governing released time courses in public schools. It would create a framework for local school units to permit off-campus religious instruction during the school day, while limiting public funding involvement, restricting use of school property absent neutral equal-access policies, and requiring sponsoring organizations to maintain attendance records, provide syllabi on request, and assume liability for students under their supervision. The act would take effect when it becomes law and apply beginning with the 2025-2026 school year.
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee debate or votes, the overall posture appears to be supportive of expanding local flexibility for religious released-time programs while attempting to address constitutional and administrative concerns through neutral, secular standards. The bill’s structure suggests an effort to make the policy more legally defensible by emphasizing parental consent, no public funding, and secular credit criteria. No formal vote history or transcript evidence is available here to show organized opposition or support beyond the sponsorship and introduction of the bill.
The main points of potential contention are the use of public school time for religious instruction, the possibility of awarding academic credit for religiously affiliated courses, and whether the policy could create unequal access or entanglement between public schools and religious organizations. Opponents may focus on church-state separation, school-day disruption, and the risk of indirect public support for religion, while supporters are likely to emphasize parental choice, local control, and the bill’s safeguards requiring neutral criteria, no public funding, and off-campus instruction. Transportation, liability, and the handling of missed schoolwork may also be practical concerns for school districts and families.