This is indeed a happy day! The wording of the ruling surpassed our hopes. It now lays some really clear precedent for future rulings, and protects us more.
This story made http://detentionslip.org! Voted #1 for school house news. Check it out for all the crazy problems in public education.
The court complaining about "legislative inaction" in their ruling was unsettling.
I wasn't seeing that natural rights or law weighed into their decision too much. Too bad.
I agree Susan, I have an essay written by an attorney friend that addresses that very subject, I just haven't had time to put the whole post together.
This is actually very similar to what happened in Michigan when, after a court ruling, some homeschool advocates desired to codify the court's ruling. The ruling divided the homeschool community in the mid '90's and has been a thorn in the side of Michigan homeschoolers ever since. The latest episode happening this year when lawmakers sought to modify the requirements and force homeschoolers to register with their local school district. The law hasn't gone anywhere at this point.
Thankfully, the word "natural" was inserted in the legislation and that has spared us some of the headaches. But it would have been better had there been no law at all. It will be interesting to watch what homeschoolers in California decide to do, and what national homeschool advocates begin to advance as well.
I can relate and there seems to be a pattern, Spunky. We had a "home school" codification attempt in Illinois a few years ago to 'help out'. It was knocked out of the Capitol, and hasn't been attempted since. Except for the federal "home school" legislation that's been popping up on a regular basis.
I wrote some about it today from my Illinois perspective in looking at what was happening in California. I don't think I've quite figured out CA homeschool laws (or not). But I don't live there, so no worries.
Harvey Bluedorn wrote a wonderful piece about "parental control over education as a basic constitutional principle and a fundamental right".
http://www.eduwrit.com/blog/?p=735
I read your post today, it was a great recap of some of the issues. Thanks for the link to Harvey Bluedorn's article as well. I'll have to check that out. I remember reading it a while back, but I think it's time to reread it.
I mostly skimmed over the decision until I got to section 4, when I started reading very closely. I noticed that in the course of making comparisons with other state homeschool laws, this court was rather impressed with New York's law, one of the most onerous in the country. Then they just had to finish it off by including an open invitation to the CA legislature to further regulate and restrict homeschooling. I hope said legislature ignores this and just lets it go, but if we were living in CA I'd really be keeping an eye on what they were up to.
Rather obviously, this court only reversed themselves because they had to. It's too bad they have a pretty low opinion of unregulated homeschooling.
Lady celt,
I had similar thoughts on the ruling and especially section four. I just finished writing another blog post about it. You can read it here.
http://
spunkyhomeschool.blogspot...california.html
Commenting by HaloScan
