The proposal probably won’t stand simply because it’s being challenged. That’s the scary part. There are many laws, such as this one on the books, and they stay on the books unless, and until someone says “wait a minute!” That’s why watchdog groups are so valuable.

Other arguments could be made to strike it, but HSLDA went straight to The Constitution.

“And, homeschool students are not students of the state, as per Adrianne’s wording — just students in the state.”

This statement lends itself to “depends on what your definition of ‘is’ is” argument, but I will refrain.

I think a mandatory number of hours behind the wheel is not a bad thing. I don’t care if that is with mom, dad, uncle or a certified driver’s ed instructor.

I know when I took driver’s ed, you could do either. If you went through driver’s ed and passed, you only had to take your sheet down to the DMV. If I remember correctly, your parents could sign your form but without the class you were subjected to a test.

I don’t think that is a bad model. Even if I’m remembering it wrong…I took DE, so not sure exactly the difference any more.

And, homeschool students are not students of the state, as per Adrianne’s wording — just students in the state.

And good grief, ChristineMM, your father and grandparents aren’t certified to teach driver’s instruction. What were they thinking? Just because you can drive a car doesn’t mean you are qualified to teach someone to drive. What if there are holes in your driving education? This isn’t toilet training, after all; I have to share the road with you!

Sorry — just feeling snarky. But isn’t it ironic that driver’s ed is probably the only subject typically taught in a high school setting for which no one seems to question the validity of home instruction or the ability of parents to provide it? (Probably because a good portion of the population was taught to drive by their parents or grandparents!) And yet it is a life or death subject (unlike algebra!)

The law seems to clearly state that all students can receive this, so I don’t know how the proposal could possibly stand. If that is what you were saying with regards to the 14th, then is seems a little redundant. I don’t see where a court could look at this and rule any other way. If the state wants to exclude private schools and homeschools, the law needs to be amended, not changed through rules and regs. It was written too clearly for that.

I disagree that a “privilege” is a “right.” I see “equal protection of the law” to mean that the law can’t turn a blind eye on theft, murder, etc. Perhaps the Supreme Court has interpreted it more broadly, I don’t know. But I don’t see the reason for the “Big Guns” when the law so clearly says any student residing within the district.

I have no problem with driver’s ed, even mandatory driver’s ed. I think it is a good program.

I don’t think homeschoolers should get special preference. I don’t know why we would need to have a child take Driver’s ed, unless mandated by law. We teach our children to drive with us, no biggie, and we prefer it that way.
However, a friend of mine lives in WA, and she said Driver’s Ed is a requirement to get your Driver’s License (I thought she said when you first get it, and it may not be for 18 and older, but I know it is for the age of those who would take Driver’s Ed.).
The only thing I was upset with about that is that I don’t think Driver’s Ed should be mandatory to get a Driver’s License. I think if you can pass a written test and a driving test, then they should give you your license. You pay for it anyway when you get it, along with mandatory insurance, taxes, title, etc. Since Driver’s Ed is not FREE, it should not be mandatory to get a license. Otherwise, it should be.
Just my two cents… :HA:
~J

It is the Fourteenth Amendment that allows one to move from one state to another and immediately take advantage of the laws and programs of your new home. Or better yet, those who live in one state and work in another. Without the protection of the Fourteenth Amendment, one would be treated like an immigrant in the various states of this great country, and we would not be allowed to move as freely as we do between the states.

Driver’s education, administered through the public school system via this statute is considered a “privilege” of “all” students. And even by a “literal” reading of the Fourteenth Amendment, that privilege is protected by the Fourteenth Amendment, therefore, there is a strong argument that this is a constitutional issue. Any law that denies any citizen the opportunity to exercise a right or enjoy privilege given them by law is a constitutional issue. HSLDA pulled out the big guns. It looks like a “strong-arm” tactic, but it is a valid argument.

Anything that can be defined as a “privilege” is protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. Depending on the wording of the laws of the state, yes home school students have rights to free and reduced school lunches, textbooks, school field trips, extracurricular activities, or anything else made available to “students” of the state. If the state wishes to exclude home school students, or any other students for that matter, it must do so expressly, or the courts will include any and all who fit the description based on the current interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment. An interpretation that is hotly contested among the justices of the current Supreme Court.

It is likely the make-up of The Supreme Court will change in the next few years, and the current application of the Fourteenth Amendment may be more restrictive.

Not sure I follow their reasoning on that one either.

I must just be weird.

Horrors.