California’s AB 84: A Threat to Parental Rights and Religious Freedom in Education

Government Overreach in Education: What Churches and Ministries Need to Know About AB 84

California Assembly Bill 84 (“AB 84”) is a controversial bill that seeks to increase school accountability by standardizing audit procedures, reviewing charter school authorizations, and considering the integration of the California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System and the average daily attendance apportionment data system.

The state’s concern in ensuring that each child gets a good education is legitimate. However, while some level of accountability and scrutiny is necessary, AB 84 goes beyond what is needed. Senate Minority Leader Brian Jones said that “[a]t its core, AB 84 hands more control to the state and union bosses while tying the hands of parents.”

This article will first argue that AB 84 is detrimental to children. Then it will show how AB 84 gives too much power to the government and limits parental rights. Finally, it will consider how it negatively impacts families.

AB 84: A Bill Detrimental to Children

The proponents of AB 84 might argue that they have the children’s best interests in mind, but this is not the case. AB 84 threatens charter school freedom and homeschool innovation by reducing funding by up to 30 percent and increasing the level of scrutiny on charter schools. While it might be easier to have a standardized education system, a one-size-fits-all approach does not work. By not supporting charter schools and homeschooling options, AB 84 can affect children with disabilities or learning difficulties who benefit more from a less structured, more flexible learning environment. A survey revealed that more than half of the parents had their children with special educational needs in a public or private school before they decided to homeschool them.  One of their top reasons for choosing to homeschool their children was that they felt that their children’s needs were not met at school.  Many parents choose to homeschool their autistic children because they recognize how difficult mainstream education is for them, and research shows that homeschooled autistic children can thrive and have good academic outcomes.  By decreasing funding for charter schools, including home-based charter schools, it becomes difficult for parents to provide their children with the kind of education that is most beneficial to them. AB 84 is ultimately harmful to children.

Expanded State Power and Reduced Parental Rights

AB 84 increases the government’s control and decreases the parents’ control by limiting schooling choices. This limitation on educational opportunities interferes with the parents’ ability to guide their children’s education and choose what type of education they want for their children. Parents want to be involved in their children’s education. This is why some parents want to have the option of homeschooling their children.  AB 84 states that “[a] local educational agency shall not allocate, or advertise the availability of, funds or credits to be spent at the discretion of a pupil’s parent, guardian, or education rights holder for educational enrichment activities that are not provided by a credentialed employee of the local educational agency for the pupil and that are paid for by the local educational agency.” This limits and restricts the educational opportunities for students in flexible learning environments, as it does not allow parents to have a specialized expert, such as a musician or artist, teach their children, unless the professional holds a traditional teaching credential. This deprives children of certain opportunities and might also limit the parents’ ability to have their children taught by professionals who have the same faith and values as they do.

One particularly problematic aspect of the bill is that it seeks to expand state auditing authority and increase compliance regulations. This not only means it will increase the time spent on reporting and paperwork for charter schools, but it could also affect these schools’ flexibility in terms of their curriculum, staffing, and school calendars. The state is overstepping its boundaries if it starts imposing every aspect of a school’s curriculum. “The child is not the mere creature of the state.”  This is why a strict scrutiny test must be applied in such circumstances. To satisfy the strict scrutiny test, the state must show that the law serves “a compelling public interest, . . . is narrowly tailored to meet that end” and it is “the ‘least restrictive means’ of achieving the interest.”  AB 84 is not using the least restrictive means. It puts the state’s interest above the parents’ right to choose the education they want for their children. In Wisconsin v. Yoder, the Supreme Court held that the parents’ right to educate their children in accordance with their religion superseded the state’s interest.  In Meyer v. Nebraska, the Court also stated that a state is to use the least drastic means of achieving a compelling state interest.  While the state has a legitimate interest in the children’s education, this level of control that AB 84 proposes is not warranted, especially when there is evidence that children perform well academically outside of a rigid classroom.  

Additionally, AB 84 arguably interferes with freedom of religion, as there is the potential that, given the limited educational choices, parents would be forced to have children attend schools that would teach a curriculum or certain ideologies that are contrary to the parents’ values and beliefs. Courts have recognized over the years the right that parents have regarding the education their children receive. They have recognized how important it is for parents to be able to raise their children according to their beliefs. In Griswold v. Connecticut, the Supreme Court stated that the parents’ right to direct their children’s education fell within the freedom of speech and religion clauses of the Constitution.  In Wisconsin v. Yoder, the Supreme Court stated that parents should be able to teach their children at home when there are no public and private schools that support their religious values.

How AB 84 Impacts Families

AB 84 can negatively impact families because it can put a strain on their relationships. While homeschooling can strengthen the parent-child relationship,  a school that does not align with the parents’ worldview can weaken the parent-child relationship. A standardized education system would not be so problematic if it were completely neutral regarding values and morals, if it only sought to teach children how to read and write, how to do arithmetic equations, and kept away from controversial topics. However, the reality is that the more control the government has, the more it seeks to instill its values in the children. The impact on families can be significant. It can diminish parents’ authority over their children, as the teachers at school might teach them contrary things to what the parents teach them, and the children might start believing that their parents are wrong to believe in such a way. It should not be surprising if parents want to have the option of homeschooling their children, so that they can prevent their children from being taught different values. While AB 84 does not ban homeschooling, it makes it more difficult for parents to homeschool their children due to AB 84 affecting home-based charter schools.

Final Thoughts for Ministry Leaders

Therefore, while AB 84 is presented as a bill seeking to increase accountability in charter schools, its effect is to limit parental rights and increase government control. By reducing funding and increasing the level of scrutiny on the charter schools, it significantly limits the schooling choices. Limiting the opportunities for more flexible learning options can particularly affect certain children. AB 84 is not in the children’s best interests.