Legal Precedents and Strategies Shaping Home Schooled Students' Participation in Public School Sports

From Conservapedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Kathryn Gardner and Allison McFarland published a law review article by this title in 11 J. Legal Aspects Of Sport 25 (Winter, 2001). They argued for greater access by homeschooled students to extracurricular activities in public schools.

The authors surveyed numerous cases listed below. They wrote, "Proponents of the right to opt-in have found the most success to date by basing that right on state constitutions or stat-utes. Although some states have constitutions whose provisions for due process, equal protection, or free exercise are similar to those in their federal counterpart, other states' constitutions have sufficient differences in wording of such provisions, or additional provisions regarding education, to give rise to different claims."

Michigan is one state where courts have ordered public schools to allow access by homeschooled students, based on the Michigan state constitution.

Decisions affecting the right of homeschooled students to access public school extracurricular activities:

  • Board of Dir's of Rotary Int'l v. Rotary Club of Duarte, 481 U.S. 537 (1987).
  • Board of Educ. Island Trees Union Free Sch. Dist. No. 26 v. Pico, 457 U.S. 853 (1982).
  • Board of Regents of State Coll's, et al. v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564 (1972).
  • Bowman v. Bowman, 686 N.E.2d 921 (Ind. App.1997).
  • Boyd v. Board of Dir's of the McGhee Sch. District No. 17, 612 F. Supp. 86 (D. Ark. 1985).
  • Bradstreet v. Sobol, 630 N.Y.S.2d 486 (1995).
  • Brockett, D. (1995). Home school kids in public school activities. The Education Digest, 61(3), 67-69.
  • Brown v. Topeka Bd. of Ed., 347 U.S. 483 (1954).
  • Care and Protection of Charles & Others, 399 Mass. 324, 504 N.E.2d 592 (1987).
  • CB by and through Breeding v. Driscoll, 82 F.3d 383, reh. den., 99 F.3d 1157 (11th Cir. 1996).
  • City of Boerne v. Flores, 521 U.S. 507 (1997).
  • Clonlara, Inc. v. Runkel, 722 F. Supp. 1442 (E.D. Mich. 1989).
  • Cloud, J. (1999, December 27). Outside wanting in. Time Magazine, 132-133.
  • [*46] Compulsory attendance at public school; enrollment dates; exceptions, Mich. Comp. Laws 380.1561(3)(d), recodified as M.S.A. 15.41561(3)(e) (2000).
  • Davis v. Massachusetts Interscholastic Athletic Ass'n, Inc., 3 Mass. L. Rep. 375 (MA Super. 1995).
  • Davis, K. & Quillen, K. (1993, July). The economics of teaching your kids at home. Kiplinger's Personal Finance Magazine, 47(7), 30.
  • Deckard, S. (Eds.) (1994). Home schooling laws in all fifty states. (7th ed.). Santee, CA.
  • Duffley v. New Hampshire Interscholastic Athletic Ass'n, 122 N.H. 484, 446 A.2d 462 (1982).
  • Edwards v. Aguillard, 482 U.S. 578 (1987).
  • Employment Div. Dep't of Human Res's of Ore. v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990).
  • Farver v. Board of Education of Carroll County, 40 F. Supp. 2d 323 (D. Md. 1999).
  • Craig Dickinson Act, Fla. Stat. Ann. 232.425 (2000).
  • Fuller, D. W. (1998). Public school access. Minnesota Law Review, 82(6), 1599-1630.
  • Gallery v. West Virginia Secondary Sch. Activities Comm'n, 205 W. Va. 364, 518 S.E.2d 368 (W. Va. 1999).
  • Gonyo v. Drake Univ., 837 F. Supp. 989 (S.D. IA 1993).
  • Hanson v. Cushman, 490 F. Supp. 109 (D. Kan. 1980).
  • Haverkamp v. Unified Sch. Dist. No. 380, 689 F. Supp. 1055 (D. Kan. 1986).
  • Hawkins, D. (1996, February 12). Home school battles. U. S. News & World Report, 57-58.
  • Herndon v. Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Bd. Of Educ., 89 F.3d 174 (4th Cir. 1996).
  • Home school students authorized to participate in interscholastic activities; conditions, Or. Rev. Stat. 339.460 (2000).
  • Idaho Code 33-203 (1995).
  • Immediato, et al., v. Rye Neck Sch. Dist., 73 F.3d 454 (2d Cir. 1996).
  • James v. Board of Educ. of Cent. Dist. No. 1, 461 F.2d 566 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 1042 (1972), reh'g de-nied, 410 U.S. 947 (1973).
  • [*47] Jeffery v. O'Donnell, 702 F. Supp. 513 (M.D. PA 1988).
  • Kan. Stat. Ann. 72-1111(e) & 72-6407 (2000).
  • Keyishian v. Board of Regents of the Univ. of the State of New York, 385 U.S. 589 (1967).
  • Klicka, C. J. (1995). The right choice: Home schooling. Gresham OR: Noble Publishing Associates
  • Klicka, C. J. (1998), The right to home school: A guide to the law on parent's rights in education. Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press.
  • Kuntz, P. (1994, February 26). Home-schooling movement gives house a lesson. Congressional Quarterly Weekly Reporter, 52(8), 479-480 (1994).
  • Lines, P. (1998, January-February). Educating a minority: How families, policymakers, and public educators view homeschooling. Journal of Early Education and Family Review, 5(3), 25-28.
  • Lines, P. (1996, October). Homeschooling comes of age. Educational Leadership, 54(2), 63-67.
  • Lukasik, L. (1996). The latest home education challenge: The relationship between home schools and public schools. North Carolina Law Review, 74(6), 1913-1977.
  • Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. City of Hialeah, 508 U.S. 520 (1993).
  • Maine v. McDonough, 468 A.2d 977 (1983).
  • Mazanec v. North Judson-San Pierre Sch. Corp., 614 F. Supp. 1152 (N.D. Ind. 1985).
  • McFarlin v. Newport Special Sch. Dist., 980 F.2d 1208 (8th Cir. 1992).
  • McNatt v. Frazier Sch. Dist., 1995 WL 568380 (W.D. Pa. 1995).
  • Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390 (1923).
  • Michigan v. DeJonge, 501 N.W.2d 127 (Mich. 1993).
  • Minn. Stat. 126.699 (1996) (renumbered as Minn. Stat. 120B20 (2000)).
  • Nakashina, E. (1995, November 26). Home-schoolers miss sports participation. The Washington Post, B1 & B3.
  • Natale, J. A. (1992). Understanding home schooling. American School Board Journal, 92, 26 (1992).
  • New Jersey v. T.L.O., 479 U.S. 325 (1985).
  • [*48] Null v Board of Educ. of the County of Jackson, 815 F. Supp. 937 (S.D. W. Va. 1993).
  • Ohio v. Whisner, 351 N.E.2d 750 (1976).
  • Ohio Ass'n of Indep. Sch. v. Goff, 92 F.3d 419 (6th Cir. 1996).
  • Palmer v. Merluzzi, 689 F. Supp. 400 (D.N.J. 1988), aff'd, 868 F.2d 90 (3d Cir. 1989).
  • People v. Bennett, 442 Mich. 316, 501 N.W.2d 106 (Mich. 1993).
  • Peterson v. Minidoka County Sch. District No. 331, 118 F.3d 1351 (9th Cir. 1997).
  • Ray, B. D. (1997). Home education across the united states, family characteristics, student achievement, & longitudinal traits. Salem, Oregon: National Home Education Research Institute.
  • Roberts, J. E. (1999, March 23). Enrollment comes first: A call to protect school sports (News Release available from the Michigan State High School Activity Association).
  • Robertson, B. (1994, October 17). Is home schooling in a class of its own? Insight on the News, 6.
  • Rust v. Rust, 864 S.W.2d 52 (Tenn. App. 1993).
  • San Antonio Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 1 (1973).
  • Santosky v. Kramer, 45 U.S. 745 (1982).
  • Schaill v. Tippecanoe County Sch. Corp., 679 F. Supp. 833 (N.D. Ind.), aff'd, 864 F.2d 1309 (7th Cir. 1988).
  • Sch. Dist. of Abington Township v. Schempp, et al., 374 U.S. 203 (1963).
  • Scoma v. Chicago Bd. of Educ., 391 F. Supp. 452 (N.D. Ill. 1974).
  • Simmons, B. (1994, February). Classroom at home. American School Board Journal, 94, 47-48.
  • Smith, M. (1996). Participation of Home School Students in Public School Activities, Scholastic and Sports Activities. Paeonian Springs, VA: Home School Legal Defense Association.
  • Snyder v. Charlotte Public Schl Dst., 421 Mich. 517, 365 N.W.2d 151 (1984).
  • State v. Shaver, 294 N.W.2d 883 (N.D. 1980).
  • State ex rel Schl. Dst. v. Nebraska State Bd. of Educ., 188 Neb. 1, 195 N.W.2d 161, cert. denied, 409 U.S. 921 (1972).
  • Swanson v. Guthrie Indep. Sch. Dist., 135 F.3d 694 (10th Cir. 1998).
  • Traverse City Sch. Dist. v. Attorney Gen., 384 Mich. 390, 185 N.W.2d 9 (1971).
  • Whitehead, J. & Crow, A. (1993). Home education: Rights and reasons. Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books
  • Whitehead, J. & Bird, W. R. (1986). Home education and constitutional liberties. Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books.
  • Widmar v. Vincent, 454 U.S. 263 (1981).
  • Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972).
Personal tools