The following was written by Christine Cooke.
Many understand education to be a state and local issue, and that federal intervention has increased during the past several decades. But our history suggests control over education is even closer to the student—that education is first a parental right and responsibility.
Here’s a quick history review.
Prior to Utah’s statehood, parents and close-knit communities in the territory educated their children using a system of private common schools. Common schools were not financed with taxes, so parents taught their children or paid someone else to teach them. At the time there were no mandatory attendance laws requiring students to attend.
Then the government stepped in. As a condition to gain statehood in 1894, the territory was required to establish government schools. To ensure that religious (Mormon) teachings did not control, the condition required that government schools be open to all students and free from sectarian control.
Of course, Utah currently funds government public education through taxes, and the Utah Code now includes compulsory attendance laws. Federal intervention in education has exploded, perhaps starting in the 1950s with President Eisenhower’s National Defense Education Act. In fact, the trend has grown into a fixation with educational accountability to the federal government instead of parents. This is true, even though according to United States Supreme Court case law and Utah State Supreme Court case law, the respective constitutions protect parental rights with regard to upbringing and education.
For example, the 1972 case Wisconsin v. Yoder acknowledges parental rights. Traditionally understood as a First Amendment free-exercise case, since it allowed Amish parents to opt their children out of schooling beyond eighth grade due to religious beliefs, it also discusses the rights of parents. The court said, “The history and culture of Western civilization reflect a strong tradition of parental concern for the nurture and upbringing of their children. This primary role of the parents in the upbringing of their children is now established beyond debate as an enduring American tradition.”
Likewise, the 2000 case Troxel et vir. v. Granville says that a parent’s interest in the care, custody and control of their children is “perhaps the oldest of the fundamental liberty interests recognized by this court.” The majority went further, saying, “More than 75 years ago … we held that the ‘liberty’ protected by the Due Process Clause includes the right of parents to ‘establish a home and bring up children’ and ‘to control the education of their own.’”
The Utah State Constitution also protects parental rights. The 1982 Utah Supreme Court case In Re J.P., regarding a standard for termination of parental rights explained that that parents’ rights to rear their own children are “natural” and “inherent.”
As the legislative session begins in a little over a month from now, hopefully education policy discussions keep parental rights in mind.
Christine Cooke is a policy analyst for The Center for Educational Progress at Sutherland Institute.
