Vicki Murray says that while Washington state elected officials are doubling down on state overreach in education, 35 states (plus Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico) are affirming parental rights by enacting and expanding educational choice programs
Vicki Murray
Washington Policy Center
Children are not creatures of the state. That’s the unanimous conclusion reached by the U.S. Supreme Court a century ago this June in its precedent-setting case Pierce v. Society of Sisters. Unfortunately, most Washington state lawmakers must have been playing hooky the day that lesson was taught.
At issue in the case was whether government has the authority to impose its will about what and where children should learn over the objections of parents. Writing for the court, Justice James McReynolds issued a resounding “No,” stating that “it [is] entirely plain” that Oregon’s 1922 Compulsory Education Act “unreasonably interferes with the liberty of parents and guardians to direct the upbringing and education of children under their control” (pp. 534-35). The Court concluded that:
The fundamental theory of liberty upon which all governments in this Union repose excludes any general power of the State to standardize its children by forcing them to accept instruction from public teachers only. The child is not the mere creature of the State… (p. 535)
Unfortunately, 100 years later, most Washington lawmakers appear to have flunked state government 101 by approving House Bill 1296. Governor Bob Ferguson (D) also earned himself a failing grade by signing the bill into law (starting at 03:58).
Under the guise of promoting a “safe and supportive education system,” HB 1296 dismantles Washington’s landmark parental bill of rights law (formerly RCW 28A.605.005 Parental rights) while unleashing an unprecedented expansion of state control over education.
HB 1296 removes the requirement for schools to notify parents of medical treatments and services offered to their children. The bill also limits parental notification regarding their children’s involvement with law enforcement or criminal activity to incidents that occur on school grounds during school hours. This means schools are no longer obligated to inform parents about incidents such as cyberbullying or cyberstalking — because everyone knows the internet politely shuts down at 3:30 PM when school ends.
Ensuring schools abide by common sense notification practices was a leading reason why the Parental Bill of Rights Initiative garnered more than 449,000 signatures—the fifth highest number of signatures in state history. Moreover, it passed the state legislature last year with overwhelming bipartisan support: 132 lawmakers voted in favor with just 15 opposed.
Instead of respecting the primacy of parents, HB 1296 unleashes an unprecedented expansion of state control over education. Under the bill, the office of the superintendent of public instruction (OSPI) may impose a variety of sanctions against local school districts, including withholding up to 20 percent of their state basic education funding, that dare to keep parents informed about fundamental safety matters affecting their children (p. 13).
On the 100th anniversary of one of the country’s landmark Supreme Court cases affirming parental rights in education, it’s perversely ironic that Gov. Ferguson and most state lawmakers are perpetuating the fallacy that Washington parents are a clear and present danger to students’ safety, security, and success in school.
While Washington state elected officials are doubling down on state overreach in education, 35 states (plus Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico) are affirming parental rights by enacting and expanding educational choice programs. (See here, here, and here.)
Such widespread esteem for parents nearly everywhere else in the United States accentuates just how anachronistic the prevailing thinking is among most Washington state elected officials — because outside of the Evergreen State, most Americans embrace the reality memorialized in Pierce v. Society of Sisters that parents know and love their children best.
Vicki Murray is a Paul W. Locke Research Fellow for Education.
Also read:
- Opinion: IBR promotes ‘giving away’ historic interstate bridges while withholding cost estimate for replacement
Neighbors for a Better Crossing argues the IBR program is promoting demolition of the historic Interstate Bridges without releasing updated cost estimates or current seismic data to justify replacement. - Opinion: Solving Washington’s deficit without tax increases
Ryan Frost argues Washington’s budget shortfall is driven by rapid spending growth rather than insufficient tax revenue, calling for slower spending and program reductions instead of new taxes. - Opinion: Bikes in crosswalks
Doug Dahl explains how Washington law treats bicycles as both vehicles and pedestrians, depending on where and how they are being ridden. - Opinion: The unpreferred and unaffordable Interstate Bridge replacement proposal
Rep. John Ley argues that the Interstate Bridge Replacement proposal is unpreferred, unaffordable, and failing to address congestion, cost transparency, and community concerns. - POLL: If project costs continue to rise, what should lawmakers do with the I-5 Bridge replacement plan?
This poll asks readers what lawmakers should do with the I-5 Bridge replacement plan as costs rise and key decisions remain unresolved.
