Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: r9etb
Dear r9etb,

Part of the difficulty is that I can't find (although I haven't looked too hard) whether or not this family actually filled out the form to be a "private school" under California law. I suspect they didn't, and now the system is using that technical violation to get in the back door on the abuse case. The opinion from the "judges" of the appeals court suggests they didn't avail themselves of that option in the law. If that's a correct speculation, then it's possible that the court is not challenging the ability of homeschoolers to use the private school option that is spelled out in law.

But the ordinary method of dealing with someone who hasn't properly filled in a form needed to do something for which they have a legal right to do is for the state, upon discovering the lacuna, to provide a little assistance in getting it fixed. And, indeed, if parents have a right to homeschool their children (and they do), it would be difficult for the court to abrogate that right over a lack of a properly-filled out government form.

Thus, the "judges," illegitimately wishing to give the state better leverage in their abuse case, had to rule that there is no right of parents to homeschool.

They're evil slobs. One hopes they repent before they must pay for their crimes.


sitetest

154 posted on 03/06/2008 12:27:48 PM PST by sitetest (If Roe is not overturned, no unborn child will ever be protected in law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies ]


To: sitetest
They're evil slobs. One hopes they repent before they must pay for their crimes.

I agree with your assessment. Evil is about the only way to characterize this attempt to attack the God-given right to homeschool by holding up one derelict family. It's the same method they use to strip people of their God-given right to self-defense. It's a disgrace and I hope Californians rise up as a result.
158 posted on 03/06/2008 12:43:12 PM PST by Antoninus (Tell us how you came to Barack?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies ]

To: sitetest
Part of the difficulty is that I can't find (although I haven't looked too hard) whether or not this family actually filled out the form to be a "private school" under California law.

According to the ruling, they claimed to be operating under the "independent study" rules of Sunland Christian School (a "valid charter school" under California law).

The ruling, again, addresses this issue by reference to California law, and relevant precedent, and rejected the claim.

Thus, the "judges," illegitimately wishing to give the state better leverage in their abuse case, had to rule that there is no right of parents to homeschool.

Well, no. They're an appellate court, which must be asked (by appeal) to address particular rulings of the lower trial court. The trial court made a specific ruling on home-schooling, which was then appealed. The appeals court took the case and ruled on it.

Again, the real issue here is that folks are trying to work around the law as written. The judges should (one hopes) stick to the law as written. And home-schoolers in California should work to change the law.

159 posted on 03/06/2008 12:44:04 PM PST by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson