But I guess you are mandated under that constitution to send your kids to failing schools where gang bangers are the law? H/T to MM for this story:
Parents who lack teaching credentials cannot educate their children at home, according to a state appellate court ruling that is sending waves of fear through California’s home schooling families.
Advocates for the families vowed to appeal the decision to the state Supreme Court. Enforcement until then appears unlikely, but if the ruling stands, home-schooling supporters say California will have the most regressive law in the nation.
“This decision is a direct hit against every home schooler in California,” said Brad Dacus, president of the Pacific Justice Institute, which represents the Sunland Christian School, which specializes in religious home schooling. “If the state Supreme Court does not reverse this . . . there will be nothing to prevent home-school witch hunts from being implemented in every corner of the state of California.”
The institute estimates there are as many as 166,000 California students who are home schooled. State Department of Education officials say there is no way to know the true number.
Unlike at least 30 other states, home schooling is not specifically addressed in California law. Under the state education code, students must be enrolled in a public or private school, or can be taught at home by a credentialed tutor.
The California Department of Education currently allows home schooling as long as parents file paperwork with the state establishing themselves as small private schools, hire credentialed tutors or enroll their children in independent study programs run by charter or private schools or public school districts while still teaching at home.
California does little to enforce those provisions and insists it is the local school districts’ responsibility. In addition, state education officials say some parents home school their children without the knowledge of any entity.
Home schoolers and government officials have largely accepted this murky arrangement.
“This works so well, I don’t see any reason to change it,” said J. Michael Smith, president of the Virginia-based Home School Legal Defense Assn.
“Parents do not have a constitutional right to home school their children,” wrote Justice H. Walter Croskey in a Feb. 28 opinion signed by the two other members of the district court. “Parents who fail to [comply with school enrollment laws] may be subject to a criminal complaint against them, found guilty of an infraction, and subject to imposition of fines or an order to complete a parent education and counseling program.”
I want you to please take the time to watch this video about an Education Revolt In Watts
Vikki Reyes has had it with Locke High, the school her daughters attend in the Watts neighborhood of Los Angeles. She walked in on class one day and recalls “the place was just like a zoo!” Students had taken control, while the teacher sat quietly with a book.
Frank Wells has also had it with Locke High. When he became principal he says gangs ruled the campus. He tried to turn things around but ran into a “brick wall” of resistance from the school district and teachers union.
Locke seemed destined to languish in high crime and low test scores until Wells, Reyes, and many reform-minded teachers joined with a maverick named Steve Barr in an attempt to break free from the status quo. Their battle is just one example of the charter school education revolt that’s erupting across the nation.
Another ruling from the imperial court of kalifornia made by a imperial judge when soon can we remove these judges from american soil?:-w
he facts are that homeschooled children consistently score higher than students from the Gov’t schools. Kalifornia needs to collapse. I hate to say it, but the State is so infected with cancers and viruses maybe the whole thing just needs to collapse. It is so screwed up, on so many levels, only a fu system Reset can offer any chance to fix it. Out of the ashes of crises perhaps real reform can come.
“Parents do not have a constitutional right to home school their children,”wrote Justice H. Walter Croskey .
Hey asshole, H. Walter Croskey, they certainly do! This jerk should be thrown off the Court and put in prison.
The Gov’t has no constitutional authority to assert itself in education.
And just what political persuasion do we think H. Walter Croskey is? I’ll guess: Liberal/Leftist.
Thats the kind of illegal ruling from a bunch of unlected imperial judges that the NAZI EDUCATORS ASSOCIATION likes:-w
Personally, I’m not a big fan of homeschooling because of the lack of interaction with kids their own age, but then again I’m not a big fan of the government schools BECUASE of the interaction with the teachers and many of the kids their own age. Robert it’s not just Kalifornia that needs a complete overhaul. This entire country is in for a world of trouble if the Dems gain enough control to actually do anything. They’re already predicting $4+/gallon of gas by this summer. Of course the Dems aren’t trying to work to increase domestic production, they’re too busy preventing domestic production while providing tax breaks to the same Hugo Chavez who, with his OPEC buddies, has just refused to increase supply to help lower prices.
Judge Creates New California Law Forbidding Homeschooling
By: Mimi Rothschild
Not since the time of Hitler’s regime with consul general for the Federal Republic of Germany, Wolfgang Drautz, have we seen such a gross assumption of power and abuse of that assumed power as what appears to be happening with the California court ruling that says that homeschooling is illegal., Without even citing the statutes or constitutional principal on which this opinion is supposedly based, Justice H. Walter Croskey wrote in a February 28th opinion for the 2nd District Court of Appeals, “Parents do not have a constitutional right to home school their children.â€
Judge Croskey’s ruling states “keeping the children at home deprived them of situations where (1) they could interact with people outside the family, (2) there are people who could provide help if something is amiss in the children’s lives, and (3) they could develop emotionally in a broader world than the parents’ ‘cloistered’ setting.”
Many people believe that sending children to school deprives them of situations in which they can interact with a far broader spectrum of people than simply those with whom they happen to share a birth year.
Many people believe that the very people in the school who are charged with the responsibility of helping a child if something is amiss int heir lives are themselves not trustworthy or credible and that some children need to be protected from them.
Many people beliebe that children develop better when not limited to the cloistered government school setting all day, every day for 13 years and that they develop better when afforded the opportunity to learn in and through the entire world.
The immediate ramifications of this shocking ruling could subject the parents of 166,000 students throughout the state of California to face the state Supreme Court for criminal sanctions. This Judge’s opinion and his abuse and overreach of his power could be a slippery slope for home educators and all those that believe in the parent’s right to raise their children according to their own convictions.
In addition to the obvious concerns that have rippled throughout the homeschooling community nationwide such as the erosion of parental rights and educational freedoms, my concern today is: At what point did our government change the Job Description of judges? Respectifully, is it within Judge Croskey’s power to create law. Isn’t the power to create laws is a responsibility given to the people by the United States government through the legislators that we elect? What statute or constitutional principal is Judge Closkey basing his interpretation that dictates that children cannot be educated by their parents unless the parent has a teaching certificate?
Is Judge Closkey creating a new law that could affect the lives of up to 2 million home educators in this country? Is Judge Closkey overstepping the carefully defined boundaries of his duties? I understand that there are concerned California citizens calling for Judge Closkey’s resignation.
Do you think that Judge Closkey’s personal personal prejudice against the concept of home education has blinded his ability to properly perform his role as an impartial adjudicator of the existing laws.
God blessed me with my children. He sent them to me and entrusts me to direct their care and education. He did not Cc or Bcc the judicial system on how I am raising them. He did not send them with a book, an amendment or a set of rules that I had to obey to produce a system’d product, to a system that I never believed in! And I know He did not send them to me so a system could hold them hostage from His presence and Truths for eight hours a day, five days a week, a hundred and eighty days a year; unable to even utter His name without a judicial mandate.
The Lord made me a parent with the right to choose where and how my child will be educated. While we are called as Christians to obey the laws of the land, there is nothing that I can see within the constitution that mandates that a California judge’s opinion on what is best for children become the law for everyone. While Judge Croskey is entitled to express his opinion and to choose how he educates his children (if God entrusts him with them), it is not within his job description to dictate how to educate mine. Unless there is a proven violation of a child’s health and safety as described in the laws preventing child neglect and abuse, this Judge is misguided in forcing parents to choose government school.
The reasons I believe that this Court’s ruling should be vigorously opposed and appealed are:
1. There is absolutely NOTHING in the constitution that dictates how I raise/educate my child regarding any aspect of their child rearing,
2. Personal and family privacy is protected, including the right to privacy about the decisions and rationale for how I raise my child.
3. Freedom to worship is protected, including the right to guide my child’s religious growth. Few dispute that government schools often have a religious agenda, known as secular humanism, which contradicts the Biblical perspective.
4. God gave the child to me to raise, not the state
5. The state has failed in its mission to educate children (the United States ranks lowest of most countries on testing)
6. One judge’s biases and misinformed opinions cannot create law.
7. Judge are to uphold only the laws that the legislators (representatives of the PEOPLE) pass.
We will continue to follow this case, and the new law that many fear Judge H. Walter Croskey has created as this case unfolds in appeals and eventually reaches the Supreme Court. This is obviously an issue near and dear to each of us, so share your thoughts by e-mailing me directly at Mimi@LearningbyGrace.org or reply to this posting.
Evil flourishes when good people do nothing. Albert Einstein