I'm actually surprised the WSJ published this.
The law does end Federal funding for school district's that do not comply and does "allow" states to "fine" (actually reduce their state funding, sheesh) if they do not comply.
But they do not have to comply and nobody can force them to.
And is that not the crux of the matter, that school districts cannot survive without Federal Funds because that entire sector has been FEDERALIZED! Ever since Eisenhower established the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (HEW) in 1953, the government has been usurping the formerly sovereign community and state controls and funding of education. Now, with the Education Department that was separated from HEW by Jimmy Carter, the country is entirely a top-down federal control and money operation save only for 'Private' schools who have fewer regulations to follow and less Federal money!
Of course the fact that the professional educator unions championed this movement has meant that the liberal and statist mindset has permeated the entire process. Thus one bake sale too many will give power to a federal oversight bureaucrat to force the offender to bend-the-knee and touch their forelock at their feudal master's bidding! That is right, we no longer have Federalism but a burgeoning return to Feudalism! Wonderful!
Cutting funding is a penalty. Any sort of promised action that is negative in nature is a penalty
That said, it's the reason the statists have worked so hard for the feds to "give" or "grant" monies to the states for various projects. It's a very effective end around the 10th amendment. Once the states are addicted to feeding on the federal teat, they become willing to take all sorts of orders to keep the "free" money coming.
Wrong. The schools can and will be forced to comply