On March 25, the California Court of Appeal granted a motion for rehearing in the In re Rachel L. case—the controversial decision which purported to ban all homeschooling in that state unless the parents held a teaching license qualifying them to teach in public schools.
The Court of Appeals said, "California courts have held that under provisions in the Education Code, parents do not have a constitutional right to home school their children. Thus, while the petition for extraordinary writ asserts that the trial court’s refusal to order attendance in a public or private school was an abuse of discretion, we find the refusal was actually an error of law. It is clear to us that enrollment and attendance in a public full-time day school is required by California law for minor children unless (1) the child is enrolled in a private full-time day school and actually attends that private school, (2) the child is tutored by a person holding a valid state teaching credential for the grade being taught, or (3) one of the other few statutory exemptions to compulsory public school attendance (Ed. Code, § 48220 et seq.) applies to the child. Because the parents in this case have not demonstrated that any of these exemptions apply to their children, we will grant the petition for extraordinary writ." The basically meant that unless the parent had a valid teaching license, they couldn't homeschool their children. (you can go to http://www.hslda.org/ to read the full opinion.) However, the automatic effect of granting this motion is that the prior opinion is vacated and is no longer binding on any one, including the parties in the case. The Court of Appeal has solicited a number of public school establishment organizations to submit amicus briefs including the California Superintendent of Public Instruction, California Department of Education, the Los Angeles Unified School District, and three California teacher unions. The court also granted permission to Sunland Christian School to file an amicus brief. The order also indicates that it will consider amicus applications from other groups. Home School Legal Defense Association will seek permission to file such an amicus brief and will coordinate efforts with a number of organizations interesting in filing briefs to support the right of parents to homeschool their children in California. “This is a great first step,” said Michael Farris, chairman of HSLDA. “We are very glad that this case will be reheard and that this opinion has been vacated, but there is no guarantee as to what the ultimate outcome will be. This case remains our top priority,” he added. As homeschooling becomes more the school of choice because of the extreme deterioriation of the public schools, some politicians and school districts are trying to prevent homeschooling. The main reason is because of the almighty dollar. When more students leave the public school system, the less the school district receives. It's a number game plain and simple. However, there are other reasons such as liberals not wanting homeschooling to occur because less influence they will have on the children to indoctrinate them on homosexuality and other perverse lifestyles, abortion, and evolution theories. Because of the extreme decision of the initial Court of Appeals decision, and other hostile and unfriendly states, groups such as the HSLDA is promoting a constitutional amendment that will make it a Constitutional right to homeschool your child. Go to http://www.parentalrights.org/ and read more. Until then.