1/2: My letter Re: Opposition to H.B. 8531 Unconstitutional Interference w/ Fundamental Parental Rights.
I write as a Rhode Island parent to urge you in the strongest possible terms to reject H.B. 8531.
This bill is not a modest procedural tweak; it is a direct, unconstitutional assault on the fundamental right of fit parents to direct the upbringing and education of their children. It cannot survive constitutional scrutiny under the Fourteenth Amendment and long-settled U.S. Supreme Court precedent.
For nearly forty years, Rhode Island families have been permitted to homeschool upon filing a simple notice with the local school committee. The committee’s role has been limited to an objective determination of whether the proposed program satisfies the state’s curricular requirements. H.B. 8531 radically changes that framework. It empowers local school committees to deny or indefinitely delay homeschooling approval whenever they subjectively conclude that approval would be “not in the best interest of the child” or that a parent lacks “competency” or “capacity” to teach.
The bill also forces children to remain enrolled in public school during the entire approval process (up to 45 days), flips the burden of proof onto parents, & denies families any meaningful judicial review. Each of these provisions violates core constitutional protections.
1. The “best interest of the child” standard is constitutionally impermissible when applied to fit parents. SCOTUS has repeatedly and explicitly rejected the notion that the state may substitute its judgment for that of a fit parent under a “best interest” standard. In Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000), the Court held that “the interest of parents in the care, custody, and control of their children is perhaps the oldest of the fundamental liberty interests recognized by this Court,” and that fit parents are presumed to act in their children’s best interests. The plurality opinion warned that a “best interest” standard cannot be used by third parties—including government officials—to override parental decisions absent a showing of unfitness. Similarly, in Parham v. J.R., 442 U.S. 584 (1979), the Court declared: “The law’s concept of the family rests on the presumption that parents possess what a child lacks in maturity, experience, and capacity for judgment required for making life’s difficult decisions… [T]he natural bonds of affection lead parents to act in the best interests of their children.”
H.B. 8531 turns this presumption on its head. It treats fit parents as presumptively suspect and invites school committees to second-guess their most intimate decisions. That is precisely the overreach the SCOTUS has condemned.
2. Forcing children to remain in public school pending approval violates established precedent.
Almost four decades ago, the Supreme Judicial Court of Mass held in Care & Protection of Charles that the state cannot compel a child to attend public school while a homeschooling application is pending without violating the family’s constitutional rights. The logic is straightforward: once parents have exercised their fundamental right to remove their child from public school, the state bears the burden of proving unfitness or harm before it may interfere. H.B. 8531 ignores this principle entirely.
3. The bill’s “trigger” provisions and burden-shifting violate due process.
The bill automatically subjects families to heightened scrutiny based on mere allegations of truancy—regardless of whether those allegations were ever proven, were dismissed, or resulted in a finding in the parents’ favor. This treats parents as guilty until proven innocent & ignores the presumption of innocence that is the cornerstone of due process. It also forces parents to affirmatively prove their “good faith,” “capacity,” and “competency” rather than requiring the state to prove any actual deficiency. Such procedural burdens on a fundamental right are constitutionally intolerable.