Parents vs. State: Who TEACHES the Child?

As America marks the centennial of a landmark Supreme Court ruling on parental rights in education, conservatives are witnessing a resurgence in the movement to protect families’ authority over their children’s schooling, echoing principles established by the Founding Fathers.

At a Glance

  • The 1925 Supreme Court case Pierce v. Society of Sisters established parental rights to direct children’s education, declaring “The child is not the mere creature of the state”
  • Founding Fathers like John Adams recognized parental rights as fundamental, with protections embedded in the Ninth and Tenth Amendments
  • President Trump has championed school choice and parental empowerment in education through various initiatives
  • The upcoming Supreme Court case Mahmoud v. Taylor could further strengthen parental rights by expanding opt-out provisions
  • Conservative organizations like Heritage Foundation have launched networks to mobilize parents nationwide

A Century of Defending Parental Authority

The 1925 Supreme Court decision in Pierce v. Society of Sisters stands as a cornerstone of American educational liberty. The Court struck down an Oregon law mandating public school attendance, famously declaring, “The child is not the mere creature of the state,” and affirming parents’ rights “to direct the upbringing and education of” their children. This landmark ruling, approaching its centennial, established a crucial precedent that continues to shape educational policy debates today.

The decision aligned perfectly with the vision of America’s founders, who viewed parental authority as a natural right predating government itself, protected implicitly by the Constitution’s Ninth and Tenth Amendments.

“The foundation of national morality must be laid in private families,” wrote John Adams, recognizing that parents, not government officials, bear primary responsibility for raising virtuous citizens.

This principle remains central to conservative educational philosophy today, with growing movements across the country advocating for strengthened parental rights amid challenges from progressive educational policies that many see as undermining traditional values and family authority.

Trump’s Legacy of Parental Empowerment

President Donald Trump established himself as a champion of parental rights during his first administration and has made educational freedom a cornerstone of his policy agenda. His support for school choice initiatives aimed to expand options beyond traditional public schools, giving families greater control over their children’s education regardless of economic circumstances.

By promoting vouchers, tax-credit scholarships, and charter schools, Trump’s policies aligned with the principle that parents, not government bureaucrats, should determine the educational environment best suited for their children.

“It’s about time,” former Congressman Bob Schaffer remarked about Trump administration efforts to revive underutilized school choice provisions in federal education law. “It appears to me the Education Department is pushing states to tighten those definitions so that ‘persistently dangerous’ actually approximates what a normal person would think is ‘persistently dangerous.'”

The administration has worked to broaden the definition of “persistently dangerous” schools, potentially allowing more students to transfer out of unsuitable learning environments. Critics argue this approach could stigmatize certain schools, while supporters contend it provides necessary relief for families trapped in failing or unsafe institutions. This policy initiative represents part of a broader commitment to educational freedom that resonates strongly with conservative voters concerned about government overreach in education.

Mobilizing for Action

The Heritage Foundation has emerged as a leading organization in the parental rights movement, launching its Parental Rights Network to connect activists across the country. This initiative aims to transform individual concerns into coordinated action by providing resources, tools, and strategic guidance for effective advocacy.

The Network encourages parents to attend school board meetings, engage with local lawmakers, and build coalitions with like-minded families. This grassroots approach reflects a growing recognition that protecting educational liberty requires active participation at all levels of government.

States like Florida and Arizona have become laboratories for parental choice in education, implementing expansive Education Savings Account (ESA) programs that give families unprecedented flexibility in directing educational funds. These initiatives allow parents to use allocated money for private school tuition, homeschool expenses, tutoring services, or specialized educational programs. However, resistance remains strong in some regions, particularly rural areas and states like Kentucky and Nebraska, where traditional public education advocates warn about potential harm to existing school systems.

The Coming Legal Battles

The Supreme Court case Mahmoud v. Taylor represents the next frontier in the parental rights movement. This case could potentially expand parents’ ability to opt their children out of educational content they find morally or religiously objectionable. Conservative legal advocates view this as a natural extension of the principles established in Pierce v. Society of Sisters a century ago. The case highlights ongoing tensions between state educational mandates and family autonomy, a conflict that has defined American education since the republic’s founding.

As the 2024 election approaches, educational freedom and parental rights are positioned to remain central campaign issues. The legacy of Pierce v. Society of Sisters continues to influence both policy discussions and cultural debates about the proper relationship between families, schools, and government in a free society. For conservatives who view parental authority as foundational to American liberty, the renewed focus on educational choice represents not innovation but a return to principles as old as the republic itself.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR