Church vs State
 

I ask that you remain calm and reasonable and hear my question before you slam "the door" back in my face. I bring this question up before a group of umpires for discussion. I apologize if this encroachment upon your civil liberties causes any personal discomfort. ;)

A wealthy televangelist owns a very large privately funded school. He doesn't believe it is fair that his students compete in the same "league" with much smaller private schools in the local area. They win their division in every sport every year. Sometimes, even the JV squad manages to take 2nd place. There are other large private schools much further away but travel restrictions prevent those schools from competing outside of state competition.

This wealthy minister is suing the state of Texas for equal protection under the law. The state of Texas has always practiced a sort of seperation between church and state {eg. abolish school prayer}. In high school, there has always been a distinct seperation between private and public school systems with two distinct governing bodies set up for high school athletics.

The question is simple. Why shouldn't his school be allowed to play in the "UIL" which controls high school athletics for public school systems? After all, those parents who choose to send their children to private school are also paying taxes to support the same public school system which denies them equal access.

How should the high court decide?

I cannot speak for every state, but in the four states that I have officiated H.S. basketball (Ohio, Michigan, Florida, and California) there is no seperation of public and private schools. I also know that there is no seperation in the following states, because I have friends that officiate in them: Indiana, Kentucky, Tenneessee, Connecticut, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, New Jersey, Mass., Vermont, and Maine.

I knew that private schools, particularly Catholic schools, can have some very powerful programs in some sports. For instance, our sons' swim for Toledo (Ohio) Start H.S. and the swimming secionals are today. Toledo St. Francis de Sales H.S. is going for its 42nd or 43rd (I cannot remember which) straight sectional championship. But that is life.

I feeling is if that the school has the money, let him in.

MTD, Sr.

In MS thet school systems are separate. Private schools will play public schools sometimes, just to have a game. They do not play very often. The private schools are small and teh "gene pool" is limited. The bulk (no pun intended) of the students are in public school. There are some exceptions around Jackson and up towards Memphis. However, the systems are separate to the best of my knowledge.

This is my take on any state. If the schools are separate, they ALL should be separate. If you let this school in or that one in, you are showing favoritism to a school b/c they have lots of $$. That's not fair to the other schools that may be smaller or have less funds available. If you let one in, let them all in. If you choose to have them separate, tehy all should be separate. In your case, maybe the state could consider eliminating the separation and have "everyone play everyone." But the question is this: How do the other private schools feel about it?

In Washington all accredited schools, whether public or private, may belong to the WIAA and compete in common leagues and districts.

Many of the private schools "play-up", that is, althought they may be "2A" in size, they belong to higher bracketed leagues. Locally, Gonzaga Prep, 2A in size, competes at the 4A level and makes it to the state tournament in football quite often.

Same here in PA. The private schools usually play quad A and are in the states every year since they can basically recruit from all other school districts.

Recruiting is prohibited by the WIAA for both public and private schools, HOWEVER, we have seen a promising freshman quarterback at a public school suddenly get religion by his sophomore year.

I do not know the issues being discussed in this lawsuit. And I do not know the laws of each state and I am not a lawyer.

My state has had private and public schools playing against each other for over well over 30 years.

And I do not see why this would be any different than Notre Dame, Stanford, Boston College or Duke playing the Michigan, Florida, North Carolina and UCLA teams of the college world. And from what I understand most HS associations do not separate the private schools from the public schools in any competition.

Peace

On Long Island, Catholic schools have their own league, but they will often play non-league scrimmages against public schools (at least in baseball). The CHSAA has adopted a "wood bat only" policy (we love that), so in those games, by mutual agreement, it will be metal bats vs. wood bats.

Mark,

I'll have to make a correction here regarding NC. There separate governing bodies for the public and private schools here in NC. I've listed the web links to the two of them. I know of only one private school, Charlotte Catholic, that belongs to the public school association. It is is a large private school and is able to compete with the public schools in all sports including football. Public schools and private schools do play each other in holiday tournaments but I don't think they ever play each other during the regular season (I can't be completely sure on that one). However, they do not compete (with the exception of Charlotte Catholic) in the playoffs. There are separate playoffs for public and private schools.


Lawrence

Public Schools- www.nchsaa.org
Private Schools- www.ncisaa.org

Hey SAump just out of curiosity, what does the SA stand for?

San Antonio, TX.

The minister lost his lawsuit at the local level against the Texas Education Agency and the University Interscholastic League which control public school athletics across the state. He has deep pockets and would like another opinion from a higher court. Many believe the case may reach the state's highest court. I am not privy to the legal system and only provide general info about the case as reported in the media.

I could probably give you an answer but I need a bit further info; I'm not familiar with Texas interscholastic activities--I assume that UIL is the governing body in the state. Does it have two subordinate groups, with non-religious schools playing in one, and religious schools in the other, or does it simply deny certain schools membership?

FWIW, Minnesota has one league, and almost all schools participate in it. Schools have the option of not being in MSHSL, but since just about every school participates in it, there is little benefit to not being a member.

Not sure
 

Texas Association of Private and Parochial Schools (TAPPS) is the other governing body. I have no clue how the groups operate. I know the TEA has legislative authority over private and charter school academic performance. I believe the TEA supports the UIL position in this matter and would believe yes is the answer to your question. The largest TAPPS schools from Houston, Dallas and San Antonio compete in state competition each year. Kinda like taking your sister to homecoming. These schools want a chance to knock off several Texas public high school football juggernauts in the super 5A division.

Judging by the name TAPPS (I'm using that as my defense later,) the delineation is not religion per se, but whether a school is public or not. If this is the case, then the minister really doesn't have much shot at a case based on equal protection--funding source does not make one a member of a protected class.

OTOH, if the correlation between a schools being private and schools being religious is close to 1, then the case could be raised that it is de facto delineation based on religion, and he might have a bit higher chance at succeeding. However, I don't see a court stating that access to particular interscholastic opponents is a right or privilege under the 14th Amendment.

If in Texas, as in Washington, the state exercises some influence and control in the business of private schools by accrediting them, the private schools should be able to make some argument that that should extend to school sports via TASO.

If, as in Washington, Texas already exerts some influence and control in the business of private schools by accredting them or their curricula, I would think the private schools could make a case that their sports should be subject to the same kind of oversight via TASO. That however, could be a case of "be careful what you wish for."

It's possible, but I don't see that happening either--whereas not only is education acredited by the state, it is mandated, and extracurricular activities are not. The difference has been highlighted in several cases where protections afforded the general student body do not carry over to mandates where participants of activities are concerned.

I'm sure that must vary state to state. In Washington, by statute, school sanctioned activities, including sports, are, in part, defined as an extension of the classroom, and are governed by the state legislature acting through the Washington Interscholastic Activities Association.

Just to clarify...South Carolina has two systems. Private schools are allowed to join the South Carolina High School League (which every public school belongs to) if they want...however only three have choosen to do so. (The last time I looked).

The vast majority of private schools in South Carolina belong to SCISAA (South Carolina Independent Schools Athletic Association). Amazingly (sarcasm alert), a number (but not all) of the schools belonging to SCISAA were founded in 1969. Which (surprise, surprise) was the year South Carolina public schools (and athletics) finally became de-segregated. That's right South Carolina fought Brown vs. Board of Education for 15 years...even though Brown vs. Board of Education was a South Carolina case.

One of the private schools that belongs to the public school league, Bishop England, (catholic schoool in Charleston) has won a TON of championships in virtually everything but football. It has created a lot of controversy in that public school coaches complain that it is unfair because Bishop England can admit students from anywhere.

Uh, no, it wasn't. It was from Topeka, KS.

And along those lines, MN has open enrollment--any student can enroll in any secondary school, assuming the school has available room.

In Alabama, we have two individual Associations, the AHSAA, made up primarily of public schools, with some private school participation, and the
AISA, made up of independent schools. Private schools that participate in sports under the auspices of AHSAA must play up by two classifications over their actual student body size. I assume this was done to
"level" the playing field. This past season, the 5A football Championship was contested between Briarwod Christian (Birmingham) and St. Paul's (Mobile),
both private schools.

I will add my two cents of legal thought without having read any pleadings or the trial judge's order:

My two cents are this: I wouldn't immediately laught at the religious school's complaint. There is a pretty well known (in Constitutional Law Circles) case that involved high school athletics. It is known as the Brentwood Academy case.

In that case, Brentwood Academy (a private school) sued the Tennessee high school association (I don't recall its official name) because the Tennessee association had put the Academy on probation and barred them from the state football playoffs (as I recall) for illegally recruiting 8th graders.

Brentwood Academy sued alleging that the Association had violated their First Amendment Right to Free Speech. In order to win, Brentwood had to first prove that the Association was a "state actor". The reason they had to prove that is because a "private actor" (i.e. a non-governmental entity) can not violate anyone's first amendment rights. A state actor, however, can violate one's first amendment right (as the first amendment has been applied to the state's through the fourteenth amendment's due process clause).

Anyways, to the surprise of many, the US Supreme Court held that the Tennessee Association WAS a state actor, and thus said Brentwood Academy's suit could go forward (the Supreme Court sent the case back to the federal district court for a trial to see if the Association did, in fact, violate the Academy's First Amendment Rights).

This was a surprise because the US S.Ct. had previously held that the NCAA was NOT a state actor, but rather a private organization. But here, however, the Court said (among other things) that the Tennessee Association's membership was comprised of 86% public schools, that those schools used public money (taxes) to pay their membership dues to the association and that state employees (i.e. principals and superintendents) ran the Association. Thus the Association was a "state actor".

(As an aside: Years later...the Tennessee Association was found not to have violated Brentwood's 1st amendment right.) However, this case was a major case in expanding who and what is a "state actor".

Thus, to bring this home, while I don't know the merits of the Texas' religious school's claim that its equal protection rights were violated...I wouldn't laugh this case off in that I have no doubt that the Texas Association is a "state actor" subject to this lawsuit.

This is definitely a case I'll be on the lookout for if it is, in fact, appealed.

Does anyone know if this case was brought in State Court or Federal Court? (And it could be either...under our US Constitution State Courts are competent to adjudicate federal claims.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_v...d_of_Education

I assume you weren't the valedictorian of your class.;)

No but I graduated in the top 2%.

Brown vs. Board of Education was 5 consolidated cases...Briggs vs. Elliot was the first and the one that started it all. It was the oldest case.

The Supreme decided to list Brown vs. Board of Education first...but Briggs vs. Elliot was FIRST. That is where the NAACP drew their first line in the sand.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Briggs_v._Elliott

And, oh yeah, my thesis was on Brown vs. Board of Education and how it has failed.

And if you don't believe that is what the NAACP considers their first case...then your wrong. I went to the NAACP rally at the South Carolina state house on MLK day a few weeks ago...and the NAACP President recognized South Carolina as being where desegration became the law of the land.

In re-reading my first post...I realize that I just said "Brown vs. Board of Education"...and yes, that case, did independently arise in Topeka, KS. However, when saying "Brown vs. Board of Education" I was refering solely to the US S.Ct. opinion...which was an opinion issued in five cases...the first of which began in South Carolina.

Lawrence:

Thanks, I stand corrected. I got the impression that the schools were not seperated due to conversations with my friends in North Carolina.

MTD, Sr.

LawUmp:

Thanks, I stand corrected. I got the impression that the schools were not seperated due to conversations with my friends in South Carolina.

MTD, Sr.

This reminds of a bill I got from my attorney. I was involved in a suit with some contractors recently. We had both the law (they had not filed a "mechanics intent to lien" at the beginning of the job and then failed to file their suit within the 90 days of last appearing on the job as allowed by Washington law) and facts (they disappeared from the job without finishing it having pretty much "labored it out") on our side.

The contractors attorney, after receiving our response to their complaint, advised them to drop the suit, which they did.

Our attorney contacted me by phone with the news and gave me the total of what we owed him. I hand delivered the check.

A week later, the attorney sent me a letter suggesting that we close the file on a potential countersuit we discussed. I agreed and told him so via mail. Shortly after, I received an invoice from the attorney for $35.50. The service listed was "writing client a letter recommending closure of file."

I'm now wondering if I'll get another invoice for the time spent in sending me an invoice?

Your not-so-witty sarcasm and story aside...you are beginning to strike me as the type of guy who would be the first to use the above historical "trivia" I have provided at some gathering in some vain attempt to impress your friends.

Either that, or judging by the contents of your last post, you have simply devolved and resorted to the lowest common denominator of attacking the messenger despite the messenger having cogently explained his original message.

I certainly hope neither is true as either would be sad (and beneath you) as I have, usually, in the past, enjoyed your posts.

WTF??? As my favorite sergeant would say...."lighten up, Francis."

I would have thought an attorney with your years of experience would be able to handle my story, which is absolutley true and void of any sarcasm, with a bit of humor. (In fact, I recieved the last invoice I referenced just four days ago. I'd be happy to scan it and forward a copy.)

Having a bad day? Surely you've heard far worse stories about members of your profession. I've heard far worse about members of my profession. Hell, you can't pick up a paper or watch CNN with seeing another teacher screwing a student.

I, too, have enjoyed and agreed with the vast majority of your posts, but this rather dour one surpises me.

As for using your trivia...no, it wouldn't be meaningful to most of those I know. To non-attorneys, Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka Kansas will always refer to the board of education in Topeka, Kansas regardless of how many cases were combined. That's why your initial post of Brown v Board of education being a South Carolina suit surprised several here.

A piece of triva my friends would find more interesting is that the colony of Georgia was first inhabited by indentured servants who British businessman conviced King George to release from debtors prison so that they could work off their debts. King George argeed that keeping them in prison would do little to get the businessman their money and just happened to a piece of land in mind.

Independent schools in NC can choose to join NCHSAA or NCISAA. Cardinal Gibbons in Raleigh is another that has chosen to be a member of NCHSAA. They play at the 2A level. I'm sure there are others.

DG,

I didn't know that Gibbons had joined also. Makes sense, they are a large Catholic high school as well. If you consider the charter(such as Gray Stone Day here in Stanly Co.) and special schools (such as the 2 schools for the deaf) as public, then Gibbons and Charlotte Catholic are the only 2 private schools I could find that are members of the NCHSAA. You are right that private schools CAN join NCHSAA, but in almost all cases they choose to join NCISAA.

Lawrence

The story
 

Source: http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/sta...e.35bc767.html
Provides more detail than I care to state and perhaps more useful to interested parties here who may follow the case.
Source: http://www.christianpost.com/article...tic_League.htm
The media only reports what took place. The initial court decision favored the UIL. No further info on appeal status.

Admission of error in OP. I said it was a large school. Facts from article cited above lead me to believe it is actually a smaller private school and has a less successful TAPPS athletic program than OP may indicate.

UIL magnate schools attract students from across nearby district boundaries. Some of the state's most successful high school programs fail to mention star players moving into the district during the eighth grade.

UIL spokesman, JW Rutledge, coached at successful 5A Judson HS. Middle school teams played under the guise of larger high school "farm" systems. JW fought repeated attempts to build another public high school in his own district. Judson swelled to over 4,000 students during his tenure as football coach. A new high school was approved after he resigned as football coach. Why does he fear competiton from smaller private schools?

Actually, no. Today was the first day I got on the field (although not as an umpire (that has to wait 7 more days)), but rather as a father playing catch with his son before his son tried out for LL baseball (minors division). :) :) :)

I apologize if I mistook the tone and meaning of your story as being an attack "on the messenger (me)"...and completely missed the humor. Please except my sincere apology.

I too find both Georgia's and colonial American history fascinating. I actually had John Hancock's great-great-great....granddaughter as a childhood classmate. (I'm not originally from SC as you might guess). As for my family, my great-great-great...pepere fought in the French and Indian War: against George Washington"s troops. He was the only one of 4 brothers to survive. Fascinating stuff.

There...now I've given you some of my family trivia, too.:D

Enjoy these days. They are special.

I remember when my sons were very young, people would tell me how fast time would fly and how soon they would be grown. I remember, also, thinking, "yeah, right." The here and now seemed to last forever then. And then, it was gone...suddenly and without warning.

My proudest achievement as a dad is that I have no regrets of wishing I had spent more time with my boys. My wife and I put watching and helping them grow above all else for 21 years.

Now, I have more memories than I have time to remember, and they are still creating more. My older son will see one of his compositions recorded later this year by Billy Hart and his combo, and my younger son will be umpiring in the Northwest League this coming season. I'll be watching baseball while listneing to my IPod.;)

Thanks for the advice...I am. My son is nearly 10 and I think...where has the time gone?

I nearly cried this week when my son said, "dad, I can't wait until I'm old enough to start umpiring with you."

But then I caught myself and said, "why in the hell would you want to do that!?!" (I'm sure you can appreciate!)

What about taxpayers?
 

They want access to the playing fields funded by their taxpayers. Nobody cares who the opponent is, just that they show up on time. They want access to $$$ long denied them too. Similar to reverse discrimination challenge filed by white people to end college entrance exam requirements and system of racial quotas based on local demographic data. Support taxation of religious school "parents" without equal representation? Seperate but equal? Yada yada yada.

Many private institutions of higher learning across Texas are fundamentally Judeo-Christian based. Here is a directory, http://dir.yahoo.com/Regional/U_S__S...rsity/Private/. Names listed on these pages support popularity of privately-run religious institutions of higher learning. Many offer baseball scholarships to deserving young students from public schools.

Since nobody has mentioned Arizona yet, I will chime in.

Private Schools can join the Arizona Interscolastic Association, by applying and meeting the requirements. Schools are placed in a classification by enrollment size every two years and are allowed to petition to be moved up or down.

There is one small catholic school in Phoenix that routinely petitions up to the highest classification (5A, division 1) in all sports every time. They have been very successful, winning several state titles in football, basketball, and baseball over the last several years.

The big issue that is going on now is in the 2A class. Most of the private schools in the metro Phoenix and Tucson areas are placed in 2A due to student enrollment. Most of the public schools in this class are from small town, rural areas. A great majority of the state championships in this class have been won by the metro area private schools in the last few years. The public schools are complaining that the metro schoos have more population to draw from, better opportunities for outside training, more athletes being able to "specialize" in a single sport, etc...

The public schools are pushing for seperate state championships for the public and private schools in this class. It will be interesting to see how this plays out....

And,
 

For a more detailed look at the Brentwood case you might want to read this article by my friend Lee Green.

http://www.nfhs.org/web/2007/08/frid...ne_on_fir.aspx

Regards,

Great article. I find, from my own experience, in my own state, that many (at my state's High School League Office) are quick to remember the ultimate outcome (that Brentwood's first amendment rights/due process rights were not violated), but seem to conveniently forget that this case conclusive determined that they are now state actors.

This issue has flared up in our state, as our state league banned one school from post-season football and another from post-season basketball for various reasons. The school banned from football was the defending state champions. (As an aside: they ended up playing their regular season and went undefeated and could not go to the playoffs).

Anyways, the state league made a lot of decisions behind closed doors, and one or both schools sued (I can't remember which)...alleging due process violations. Specifically, that they were banned without a public hearing.

Publicly, high school league officials continued (and continue to this day) to state that "it is not a state agency". But amazingly, in both cases they have relented and allowed an open public hearing (of league board members) on whether the schools should be banned. In otherwords, board members were forced to vote in public on the issue.