As the CHOOSE Act rolls out for 2025–26, an alarming decision by the Alabama High School Athletic Association (AHSAA) threatens to derail both parental rights and legal intent. By demanding that students who transfer using education savings account (ESA) funds—established via a refundable income tax credit—sit out a year from high school athletics, the AHSAA has gone beyond its authority and is in direct conflict with state law.
This erroneous ruling is not an isolated incident—it’s part of a broader pattern of AHSAA asserting unchecked power over student participation. There is a troubling history where AHSAA places harsh mandates over fairness—often without consideration to legal boundaries, student welfare, fairness, or religious accommodation. The AHSAA denied religious accommodation in 2022 to a high school basketball team forced to forfeit a game due to Sabbath observance. Despite all parties agreeing to a schedule change, AHSAA refused to accommodate the students and their families, showing a complete disregard for religious liberty. https://www.13abc.com/2022/02/25/alabama-high-school-athletic-association-explains-reason-not-moving-adventist-teams-game-sabbath. The organization was later forced to change their rules. https://www.al.com/highschoolsports/2022/09/ahsaa-adopts-new-rule-allowing-religious-accommodation-requests-in-championship-play.html
Enter the CHOOSE Act – A Tax Credit, Not a Scholarship or Incentive
The CHOOSE Act, passed by the legislature in 2024, is not a school-directed scholarship—but a refundable state income tax credit deposited into an Education Savings Account (ESA) and directed by parents – not schools. These funds empower parents—not schools—to direct education-related spending. Under Alabama Code § 16‑6J‑3, a parent can claim a refundable income tax credit of up to $7,000 (for private school enrollment) or $2,000 (for home-based education), subject to eligibility thresholds that are in place until 2027. These tax credits are not tied to any single institution’s preference or direction. Rather, they are controlled by parents.
The CHOOSE Act clearly states: “Nothing in [the CHOOSE Act] shall affect or change the athletic eligibility of student athletes governed by the AHSAA.” Parental payments are a matter of tax policy and parental choice, not an athletic or admissions lever. Lawmakers and the governor have already condemned the AHSAA rule. https://www.trussvilletribune.com/2025/08/28/ahsaa-rule-could-sideline-students-using-school-choice-funds/Governor Kay Ivey “strongly disagrees,” and legislators maintain that the CHOOSE Act was never intended to trigger athletic penalties. https://1819news.com/news/item/ivey-lawmakers-slam-ahsaa-rule-sidelining-school-choice-students-from-participating-in-sports-they-need-to-revisit-this-immediately
The CHOOSE Act ESA program is meant to alleviate the financial burden on families, especially priority groups for the first three years. It’s not an extra benefit or a scholarship program controlled by schools; it’s a bridge to access controlled by families. Punishing families for utilizing lawfully granted tax relief will disproportionately harm the students the program is meant for. In its first year, the CHOOSE Act awarded $124 million in ESAs, with most applicants already in private or homeschool; about 3,000 public-school students switched to private schools thanks to the law. Legislative intent and the law passed by the Alabama Legislature addresses AHSAA participation for CHOOSE Act participants. Further, administrative rules promulgated by the Department of Revenue outlined rules and regulations for parents and education service providers to follow. Those rules are silent regarding athletic eligibility and no changes were made in the Alabama rule-making process regarding this issue. To be clear: current Alabama law stipulates that CHOOSE Act participants maintain full athletic eligibility.
If a refundable tax credit program can disqualify students from basic extracurricular activities, it fundamentally undermines the notion of parental control and negates legislative intent regarding school choice. Disqualifying students with hastily passed rules from an organization with a storied history of overreach is punitive behavior and is outside of the purview of the AHSAA. AHSAA must rescind the rule immediately, clarifying that ESAs—being a refundable tax credit program and not school directed financial scholarships —do not trigger sit‑out requirements.
CHOOSE Act families are not “buying eligibility”—they’re utilizing a state‑created tax credit, granted by state law. To penalize them is not only poor public policy—it’s a violation of both legal intent and parental rights. AHSAA must immediately reverse course—for the sake of fairness, families, and the very spirit of competition.
