by Jorge Gomez • 2 minutes
First Liberty is asking a federal appeals court to rehear our California Charter Schools case.
We recently petitioned the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to review the case en banc, before a full panel of judges. We’re challenging a lower court decision that allows California to discriminate against families who choose faith-based curricula in homeschool aid programs.
The parents we represent—John and Breanna Woolard, Hector and Diana Gonzales, and Carrie Dodson—are all devout Christians who are raising school-age children and whose Christian faith is central to who they are.
Our clients educate their children completely at home, at their own kitchen tables. California offers a program through its online charter schools in which families can access public funds to choose homeschool curriculum, other instructional materials, and extracurricular activities for their children.
But the state says parents are not allowed to choose any religious curriculum or school materials –not even historical works by Jonathan Edwards or Easter-themed legos. Additionally, the schools refuse to issue credit for coursework that originates from a religious curriculum, a religious publisher, or that reflects a religious perspective.
We filed a federal lawsuit arguing that the government is treating religious families more harshly than everyone else by excluding them from a publicly available benefit, which is unconstitutional.
A three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit rejected the families’ challenge to these discriminatory practices in a ruling in September.
“Our clients simply want to be free to choose curricula that fits their families’ needs without facing religious discrimination,” said Kayla Toney, Counsel for First Liberty. “The Constitution does not permit that singling out of religion for disfavored treatment.”
“Instead of supporting these parents’ commitment to their children’s religious upbringing,” Kayla adds, “these California programs expelled the Dodsons and refused to give credit to the Woolard and Gonzales children for their worksheets simply because they mentioned God or came from religious publishers.”
“We are hopeful that the full Court will grant rehearing and come to the right decision, restoring protection for bedrock First Amendment principles,” said Alexander Kazam, partner at King & Spalding, which serves as co-counsel.
Multiple Supreme Court decisions make it abundantly clear that the government cannot punish or single out families merely because they want to follow their faith.
The Court’s landmark ruling in First Liberty’s “Treat Children Fairly” case, Carson v. Makin, held that states can’t discriminate against parents who want to use state-provided funding to attend religious schools simply because those schools are religious. This was a major win protecting religious education nationwide. And more broadly, it ensures that all religious organizations and people of faith can participate fully in school choice programs.
A rehearing before a full panel of eleven judges significantly raises the stakes and impact that this case will have on religious liberty and the right of families to choose what’s best for them. A request for en banc rehearing is usually the last step before a case reaches the U.S. Supreme Court.
Winning won’t just impact three families in California. This case impacts virtually every family in America—and we need your support as we litigate at the highest level. This is our opportunity to potentially set a precedent that protects not only our clients, but also your family and millions of families across the country.
 |
|
|
