Parents: Fighting Back Against School Choice Sabotage

We have filed our reply brief at the Ohio Supreme Court, defending a parent’s right to have her child transported to their school of choice. This case exposes how public school bureaucracies attempt to circumvent state law and burden families who choose religious or private education.

Marrisa Siebold, a hardworking single mother, requested transportation for her child to attend their chosen school. Under Ohio law, the Columbus City Schools Board of Education is required to provide interim transportation while any transportation disputes are under review. Instead of following the law, the board refused.

Our legal arguments center on several key points. First, the law clearly states the school board “shall provide transportation” during appeals, with no exceptions or alternatives provided in the statute. The board has claimed that it can choose to pay a penalty instead of providing transportation. This completely misreads the law. We’ve demonstrated this is like claiming someone can “choose” between following speed limits or paying speeding tickets – the penalty exists to punish violations, not create an alternative to compliance.

Furthermore, there is no adequate alternative remedy available to families. The Ohio Department of Education and Workforce (DEW) lacks authority to enforce transportation requirements, and the maximum $2,500 penalty is often less than the actual damages families suffer. Administrative appeals cannot provide complete relief to affected families.

This case goes far beyond just transportation. It represents the protection of parental rights in education, equal access to educational choice, prevention of discrimination against religious education, and holding government officials accountable to the law. The board’s actions create significant barriers for working parents who can’t transport children themselves, lower-income families seeking better educational opportunities, families choosing faith-based education, and single-parent households managing complex schedules.

We’re asking the court to order the board to fulfill its mandatory transportation duties, recognize families’ right to enforce transportation requirements through mandamus, award damages for the board’s unlawful conduct, and establish clear precedent preventing similar violations statewide. The case is fully briefed and awaiting the Ohio Supreme Court’s decision.

This case exemplifies the ACLJ’s ongoing mission to protect religious liberty and parental rights. The school board’s position would effectively nullify the legislature’s careful protections for school choice, allowing bureaucrats to simply pay minimal penalties rather than respect families’ rights.

The ACLJ remains committed to defending families like the Siebolds against government overreach and ensuring that choosing religious education doesn’t mean sacrificing legal protections. Your support makes these vital legal battles possible. Stand with us as we defend families against bureaucratic obstruction of educational choice.