Tomorrow’s Advance Report newsletter will have a spotlight on the Home School Legal Defense Association. Here is Daniel Herbster’s interview with Will Estrada. For more information check HSLDA.org.
DH: We are grateful to be able to interview Will Estrada who is the Director of Federal Relations for the Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA). I’ve had the privilege to meet Will many times in our nation’s capital, and am excited about interviewing him for our readers.
Will, what is HSLDA?
WE: HSLDA was founded in 1983 by Michael Smith and Michael Farris. When HSLDA began, homeschooling was effectively illegal in 45 states. Today, we have over 80,000 member families and homeschooling is formally recognized in all 50 states. We have spent the past 25 years defending the right of parents to homeschool and advocating for homeschool freedom in the courts and legislatures.
DH: How long have you been with HSLDA and what kind of things do you do for them?
WE: I came to HSLDA in January, 2004 and worked as a legal assistant for HSLDA staff attorney Scott Woodruff. After graduating from law school in 2006, I became the Director of HSLDA’s Federal Relations Department, and serve as HSLDA’s federal lobbyist in D.C. My main task is to monitor federal legislation to make sure nothing is proposed that would negatively affect the freedom to homeschool. HSLDA’s message to the federal government is that homeschoolers want to be left alone and that homeschoolers should not be discriminated against in any scholarship or enlistment opportunity in the military. I have also recently been serving as the Director of Generation Joshua, a division of HSLDA that works to elect godly leaders. We also train and inspire the next generation to make a difference in our nation.
DH: I know a lot of people are concerned (and rightfully so) about the recent state appellate court ruling in California. Can you tell us a little about the ruling and what HSLDA is doing about it?
WE: Some have contended that the decision of the Court of Appeal in In Re Rachel L. only affects that particular family. While a court order can only direct one family to stop homeschooling, the case clearly sets a legal precedent that will be binding against all other families if this case is not reversed. (Technically, the decision is binding only in the Second District which consists of Los Angeles, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, and Ventura counties. However, other appellate districts will normally treat it as persuasive precedent. If ratified by the Supreme Court of California, it formally binds all California counties.)
There are two basic issues in the case:
- Does state law allow parents to homeschool without a state teaching credential?
- If not, is this law unconstitutional?
Below are three short quotations from the case which give the clear answer:
“It is clear to us that enrollment and attendance in a public full-time day school is required by California law for minor children unless (1) the child is enrolled in a private full-time day school and actually attends that private school, (2) the child is tutored by a person holding a valid state teaching credential for the grade being taught.”
“California courts have held that under provisions in the Education Code, parents do not have a constitutional right to school their children in their own home.”
“We agree with the Shinn court’s statement that ‘the educational program of the State of California was designed to promote the general welfare of all the people and was not designed to accommodate the personal ideas of any individual in the field of education.’ ”
In the first quote the court makes it clear that it believes that parents may not operate their own private schools. In the second they deny that a parent has a constitutional right to homeschool, and in the third they concur that California law does not accommodate parents pursuing their own education program for their children.
As you can see, the decision is categorical and was not written to be limited to just the facts of this case.
HSLDA plans to support the family’s petition for review to the California Supreme Court and file an amicus brief on behalf of all our members, and others we represent, if the California Supreme Court accepts the case for review.
DH: How can our readers help you in addressing the problem in California, and how can we prevent this kind of thing from spreading to other states?
WE: Concerned citizens can keep informed with the latest developments in California by going to www.hslda.org. At the moment the legal process is unfolding and we need to wait and see what the court decides before suggesting any new courses of action. In the long-term, amending the U.S. Constitution is necessary to uphold parental rights. Please visit www.ParentalRights.org for more information.
DH: What are some other issues HSLDA works on?