The child is not a mere creature of the State

Parental rights are not something the government gives, and any free society should never permit it to be so.

This week, we celebrate the 100th anniversary of the landmark decision Pierce v. Society of Sisters. In that case, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled that "the child is not the mere creature of the State."

The ruling was monumental because it affirmed parents' rights to direct their own child's education, protected private and religious schools, and led to the movement of education choice that is helping so many children today.

In 1922, Oregon passed a law requiring students to attend public schools and only public schools. In other words - private or religious schooling was outlawed.

The law was supported by anti-immigrant and anti-Catholic views, eerily similar to advocacy for the controversial Blaine Amendment, which is still supported today by some extremists.

The court stepped in and affirmed parental rights, ruling unanimously that the government had no right to compel students to attend government schooling. The law was a violation of the 14th Amendment.

"Under the doctrine of Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U. S. 390, we think it entirely plain that the Act of 1922 unreasonably interferes with the liberty of parents and guardians to direct the upbringing and education of children under their control. As often heretofore pointed out, rights guaranteed by the Constitution may not be abridged by legislation which has no reasonable relation to some purpose within the competency of the state. 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." -Majority opinion, Pierce v. Society of Sisters

The impact of the case is still evident today. It is parents, rather than the government, who are best suited to decide their child's educational needs and school choice. Had the court decided differently, we might not have charter schools, magnet schools, specialty schools, and religious institutions that provide education to millions of students who may not thrive in the public school system. We certainly wouldn't see the advancement of choice options in more than half the states, including Idaho, Montana and Wyoming.

The court is likely to reaffirm parental rights this session in Mahmoud v. Taylor, when it decides whether public schools burden parents’ religious exercise when they compel elementary school children to participate in instruction on gender and sexuality against their parents’ religious convictions and without notice or opportunity to opt out.

More broadly, as this discussion from the American Enterprise Institute highlights, the court may need to weigh in on how to apply parental rights to new contexts.