AmericanPapist Comments
I remain wary. We already have books saying that Christianity is a delusion or some kind of mental disease and that to foist this on one's own children is a form of child abuse. How long before a court declares the transmission of Christianity to be child abuse and takes away parents' right to educate their children?
The law is not yet really stable in this regard. It really needs a constitutional amendment to firm it up. We can't depend on our (California) legislature which does everything it can to undermind our rights.
Actually, I do not believe that (yet another) constitutional amendment is necessary to "firm up" the law in this regard. Jonathan L. v. Superior Court is very peculiar exercise of judicial activism, which I grant you, is becoming increasingly common. Regrettably, I do not believe inept judicial decision-making can be cured by constitutional amendment.
The only issue actually before the California appellate court was whether dependent children could be required, for the sake of their safety and welfare, to attend a public school and/or full-time, private day school. Why the court of appeals took it upon itself to decide whether home schooling was legal under California law is perplexing.
It is especially perplexing because this same court readily acknowledged that any blanket prohibition of home schooling would violate the U.S. Constitution. In other words, this court realizes that California, or any other state for that matter, cannot make home schooling illegal.
This area of the law has been stable since 1972 when the U.S. Supreme Court decided Wisconsin v. Yoder, which held that Amish children were exempt from compulsory education laws. If Wisconsin could not force Amish children to attend any school, California cannot force home-schooled children to attend public school. [Actually, this area of the law has been stable since 1925, thanks to the Society of Sisters of the Holy Names of Jesus and Mary. When the state of Oregon passed a compulsory education law requiring all children to attend public schools, the Sisters (along with a private military academy) sued, arguing the law unconstitutional. They won. The U.S. Supreme Court found it "entirely plain" that the Oregon law "unreasonably interferes with the liberty of parents and guardians to direct the upbringing and education of children under their control."]
That California cannot make home-schooling illegal is "entirely plain." That abused children can be required to be schooled outside of the home is "entirely plain." Why the California appellate court handled the case in this manner is, as they are fond of saying in catechism class, a mystery.
Commenting by HaloScan
