Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Legal Commentary Blogs -> Prawfs
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Legal Commentary
: PrawfsParental rights & public schools
By Dan Markel, Ethan Leib, Rick Garnett, Matt Bodie, Paul Horwitz , Steve Vladeck, and Orly Lobel
One of the oddest "phantom fundamental rights" is the right to raise and educate one's children. The Court repeatedly recognizes it as fundamental under the 14th Amendment, citing Pierce and Meyer, the Ur cases of modern substantive due process. But the right is almost never enforced against some of only state laws that are likely to burden it -- that is, state laws pressuring kids to attend public schools.
But the Court is in conference this morning considering a cert petition that addresses precisely this sort of pressure. In Smith v Barrow, the Fifth Circuit upheld a district court's application of strict scrutiny to a public school official's refusing to consider a teacher for a promotion unless she moved her kid from private religious school to public school. The teacher won a jury verdict of 35k on the theory that her right to Pierce/Meyer right to control the education of her children had been burdened. The jury had expressly found no burden on any right of religious free exercise: the only right at stake was the "pure" parental right, not the "hybrid" parental + free exercise right suggested by Yoder.
Will the Court grant the petition? I think not: This particular issue is impossibly contentious. If the Court were to affirm, then expect a flood of litigation from home-educating parents demanding access to public schools' athletic, musical, and other extra-curricular programs. There already is plenty such litigation rumbling along in the lower courts -- but an infusion of strict scrutiny from SCOTUS would certainly cause organizations like the Homeschool Legal Defense Fund to press more of them successfully. But if the Court does not affirm, then what's left of the vaunted Pierce/Meyer right?
Sometimes it is just easier to decide not to decide.
On the other hand, I've been wrong before in my predictions. I thought, for instance, that the Court would not grant cert in United States v. Lopez, another Fifth Circuit opinion written by Judge Garwood. Maybe Garwood has triggered yet one more revival of a hitherto moribund doctrine.
Full post as published by Prawfs on May 16, 2008 (boomark / email).
Cumulative Voting
Protecting minority shareholder interests
The Civil Rights Act of 1871
Law bans discrimination enacted under color of state law
State Will Statutes
State Differences in Last Will and Testament Checklist
Discrimination
Federal laws prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, or disability
Heart of Atlanta v United States
Supreme Court Decision: Civil Rights Act Protected by Interstate Commerce Clause
Rally Rights
Gettysburg Borough awards arrested protester $22,500 civil rights settlement.
KeyBank USA
alleging the bank offered loans for fraudulent vocational schools.
Kamehameha Schools
$7 million non-native Hawaiian racial discrimination settlement.
Civil / Human Rights
alleging violations of basic human and civil rights.
Clopidogrel Marketed as Plavix FDA Issues Public Health Advisory
Clopidogrel Marketed as Plavix FDA Issues Public Health Advisory
Nursing Home Abuse
New Data Made Public

Case Law Development: Poverty Not A Basis for Termination of Parental Rights
Theorizing The FLDS Case: Should Texas Terminate Parental Rights
M.E.C. v. Com., Termination Of Parental Rights (Ky)
Termination of Parental Rights and Absentee Clients
ADF: Montana judges decision is path to destruction of parental rights
Stall Tactic - Involuntary Termination of Parental Rights








