As has been explained on numerous other threads regarding this alleged child abuse case, had either parent annually filled out a simple form, instead of lying to the state, the worst scenario they would now face is incarceration for child abuse.
Have I misunderestood? Is home schooling in California a matter of a simple, annual registration of a residence as a private school?
No. Here is my understanding of the case.
The family was operating under the aegis of a private Independent Study Program: Sunland Christian School. The ISP filed the R4 covering these kids. The administrators were apparently not satisfied with the children's progress and booted them out. At that point the parents had no coverage and no opportunity to file an R4 (which has a narrow time window in October). Their choice was to enroll their children in a public school or a private school or ISP. They chose the former.
CPS showed up and filed a case claiming child abuse. The parents were appointed a PUBLIC DEFENDER operating under contract to CPS (no conflict of interest there /s). The public defender dug out wild claims of Constitutional rights, etc, essentially creating the case against which the educrats would love to have a judgment. On appeal, they did.
It is the breadth of the opinion that is the real problem. It interprets the law specifying qualifications for in-home tutoring (which is apparently credential-only) to private schools operating in homes under R4; i.e., home education. It cites the State as a sole arbiter of what constitutes a satisfactory education (as if the state schools deliver such a product). As such, the opinion is a threat, as is evident from the celebratory statements from the CTA.