Richard Komer's paper helpfully and carefully shows that, after the Supreme Court's 2002 ruling in Zelman v. Simmons-Harris, a formidable obstacle to choice-based educational reform has been removed, and also that other, no-less-formidable obstacles remain, in the form of anti-aid provisions contained in various states' own constitutions. This brief, appreciative Comment notes, first, that uncertainties remain about the implementation and interpretation of Zelman, and even--considering the possibility of new appointments to the Court--the decision's fate. Next, and moving beyond the Court's First Amendment doctrine, this Comment suggests that the effort to implement choice-based educational reform is, and will remain, as much a political fight as a legal one. Finally, it emphasizes that real choice-based reform depends on there being real choices. For choice-based reform to get off the ground, there need to be plausible, solvent, qualified, educationally sound, and attractive private options available. More specifically, and given the reality that most private schools are religiously affiliated, school choice supporters have a stake in the health and survival of parochial schools, especially in urban areas. It is, therefore, in the vital interest of school choice advocates, of all faiths and none, that inner city parochial schools survive and thrive.