But there is a substantive difference. If the parent/school isn't certified, an affidavit must be filed to ensure compliance. With certification, there's no need for the affidavit, if the tutor exemption is used.
Yes, the court argued in a way that can be used against homeschooling, but it didn't rule that it's unlawful.
Perhaps if the family had claimed the Private School Exemption (EC 48222) for themselves (filing an affidavit and complying with the other requirements) instead of claiming Sunland Christian School as the relevant "private school," the court would have addressed this question directly. But as it stands, that is not what happened.
I agree with you that there is a substantive difference by the appeals court decision favorably quotes that languagge from Turner which said that there is not one. The courts conclusion is not fleshed out since it simply ruled that there is no constitutional right to homeschool and then remanded the case for legal and factual findings. However, the court did did make another statement near the end of the case which seemed to incorporate Turner’s finding by reference. Here is that quote which you can find on the top of page 11.
“The Legislature has not amended the substantive aspects of the compulsory education statutes that were analyzed in Turner and Shinn. Like those courts, we find no reason to strike down the Legislature’s evaluation of what constitutes an adequate education scheme sufficient to promote the “general diffusion of knowledge and intelligence,” which Article IX, section 1 of our Constitution states is “essential to the preservation of the rights and liberties of the people.””
That, in many contexts, is what is called “a distinction without a difference”
And what about this “certification” crappola? How do parentrs from here on our go about that? What is the cost? Is this free? State-sponsored? And what kind of material must be on the “approved list”
First, beyond the law now study to date has demonstrated the efficacy and need for certification other than job creation programs.
Are you about to tell us in one more breath that the author’s interpretation of this ruling is not only wrong, but that certification is now not the requisite for teaching in a private or homeschooled environment.
Much murk here. Please advise in that case.
Thus far, I noticed the only ones cheering are the teachers’ unions. Presumably their interpretation is not yours. Why would THAT be? If they are correct, how could YOU be? If they are wrong, then in that case it is obvious that they have no analytical skills about the laws of their state.
Thus certification is of utterly no value in any case.