Homeschooling and parental rights under attack in California


Declaring that "parents do not have a constitutional right to home school their children," the Second District Court of Appeal for the state of California recently issued a ruling that effectively bans families from homeschooling their children and threatens parents with criminal penalties for daring to do so.

According to the Home School Legal Defense Association this court decision has made "almost all forms of homeschooling in California" a violation of state law. Once again our judicial system moves to restrict religious and personal liberties, severely limit parental rights, and significantly increase the power, scope, and control of the state over our lives.

But there is potential good news. On March 25, the appellate court vacated the ruling and will re-examine the case. The case would be reheard as early as this summer.

There are approximately 166,000 home-schooled children in California. With the stroke of a pen the appellate court, in it's initial ruling, criminalized the lawful educational choices of tens of thousands of innocent families across the state, subjected them to possible fines, and labeled their children as potential truants. This activist court chose to bypass the will of the people and legislated from the bench based on anecdotal evidence and its own clearly biased and subjective opinions about the constitutionality of parental rights and the quality of a home-schooled education. That decision attacked the freedom of parents to decide on the best educational environment for their children, restricted their religious rights to practice their faith without governmental interference, and violated their freedom to raise their offspring as they see fit without the ideological pollution and atheistic/leftist indoctrination so prevalent in our public school system.

A contradiction of concern
In a state that allows minors to have abortions without parental notification and consent, having the court complain about the welfare and safety of children who are home-schooled is laughable. The court also conveniently turned a blind eye to the increasing levels of violence and murder in many California public schools, as well as the abysmal quality of education in those very same schools. With California ranking near the bottom in the quality of its public education system, a statewide illiteracy rate of approximately 24 percent, and drop-out rates hovering around 30 percent, the California public education system is not the shining example and standard the courts should be applying and measuring against.

The appellate court reviewed the decision reached by a juvenile court regarding the quality of education provided to home-schooled children of the Phillip and Mary Long family. The children were home-schooled by Mrs. Long with assistance from the Sunland Christian School, a private religious academy in the Los Angeles area. According to its Web site, SCS "is a private school in the state of California and is an accredited home school program offering independent home schooling study, correspondence home schooling and online home school." The Long children were enrolled in the independent study program at SCS. While the lower court had concerns about the quality of the education received by two of the eight children, the trial court did not order the parents to enroll their children into a private or public school, and stated in its opinion that "parents have a constitutional right to school their children in their own home."

Scope of decision broadened
Rather than confine its ruling to the specifics of the Long case, the court of appeals instead chose to considerably broaden the scope of its decision, further strengthen state power over individuals, and deny California parents the right to home school their children. In his written opinion, filed Feb. 28 Justice H. Walter Croskey, joined by the other two members of the appellate panel, categorically asserted that: "parents do not have a constitutional right to home school their children." Furthermore, in the section ominously named "Consequences of Parental Denial of a Legal Education" the judge states:

"Because parents have a legal duty to see to their children's schooling within the provisions of these laws, parents who fail to do so may be subject to a criminal complaint against them, found guilty of an infraction, and subject to imposition of fines.... Additionally, the parents are subject to being ordered to enroll their children in an appropriate school or education program and provide proof of enrollment to the court, and willful failure to comply with such an order may be punished by a fine for civil contempt."

The totalitarian impulses of the court were further evidenced by the arguments it used to justify its decision: "A primary purpose of the educational system is to train school children in good citizenship, patriotism and loyalty to the state and the nation as a means of protecting the public welfare." As someone who has lived and suffered under a communist regime (I grew up in Romania), the "good citizenship," "patriotism," and "loyalty to the state" justifications have struck a little too close to home. These were precisely the kinds of arguments the communist party used to broaden the power of the state, increase the leadership's iron grip on the people, and justify just about every conceivable violation of human rights, restrictions on individual liberties, and abuses perpetrated by government officials.

Serious implications
Michael Smith, president of HSLDA, warned of the implications if the ruling stands.

"California is now on the path to being the only state to deny the vast majority of home-schooling parents their fundamental right to teach their own children at home," he said.

This is exactly what the judges did and the precedent they tried to set for California and possibly for the rest of the country.

Fortunately, the people of California and home-schooling associations across the country, outraged by these latest developments, are taking steps to proactively deal with and redress the situation.

Even Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has issued a statement in full support of home-schooling families.

"Parents should not be penalized for acting in the best interests of their children's education," he said. "This outrageous ruling must be overturned by the courts and if the courts don't protect parents' rights then, as elected officials, we will."

It remains to be seen if reason and common sense will prevail during this judicial review. The relentless march toward full government control of all areas of our lives must be halted. The people must push back. Our children's lives and their future are too precious to surrender to government bureaucrats and teacher's unions. For their sake, and ours, freedom must prevail.

Chris Banescu is an attorney, entrepreneur, and university professor. He is an ethics and business management specialist, and manages the conservative Web site and blog at

Published, May 2008