What If School Is Unconstitutional?

How compulsory education laws violate your First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendment rights

What’s the underlying assumption behind compulsory education laws?

That you, as a parent, will neglect your child — or more to the point, are already neglecting your child. That’s the premise the state must adopt in order to justify compulsory education. If the government truly believed parents were, on the whole, responsible and capable of educating their children, these laws wouldn’t exist.

We don’t pass laws that compel action based purely on what might happen. At least, we’re not supposed to. We don’t incarcerate people preemptively because they might commit a crime. But with schooling? You had a baby — and the state assumes you're going to neglect their education. Not some parents. All parents. That’s what compulsory schooling assumes.

And how do they act on that assumption? By sentencing every parent and child to a 13-year obligation, regardless of individual circumstances. The law applies equally to families with no history of neglect or concern. You don’t get a day in court. There is no probable cause. There is only your child’s birth certificate, your tax return, and your zip code — and that’s enough to trigger state control over your child’s education.

Let’s talk about rights.

The Fourth Amendment

This amendment protects against unlawful searches and seizures — meaning the government cannot intrude on your privacy or property without probable cause. So what is the state’s probable cause for seizing control of your child’s education the moment they turn five or six?

There is none.

Compulsory education laws function on a blanket presumption of guilt. The state doesn’t investigate your family or review your individual circumstances. It simply assumes that because you're a parent, you're potentially dangerous — and your child's education must be monitored and directed by law.

The Fifth Amendment

The Fifth Amendment guarantees due process. Before the government can deprive you of liberty or property, you’re supposed to have your day in court.

But when it comes to education, the sentence is handed down with no trial. No hearing. No opportunity to argue that you are, in fact, capable of educating your child — or that you intend to do so in your own way.

Instead, you’re told what education is, what it looks like, how many hours it must happen, which subjects must be covered, and when. And if you decide to homeschool, you must apply for permission, meet qualifications, log hours, submit test scores — and still be held to the state’s definition of “schooling.”

Where is the due process in that?

The First Amendment

Now let’s talk about speech, thought, and association.

Who decides what your child hears, says, or thinks during their 13-year sentence? The state. Who they’re around, what ideas they’re exposed to, what beliefs are promoted — it’s all decided for you. Freedom of association? Gone. Freedom of expression? Only within the bounds the state permits.

And if you object? If you keep your child home too many days, for any number of personal reasons — sickness, mental health, family needs — you could be charged with truancy. Social services might come knocking.

The Cost of Compulsion

You are also compelled to pay for all of it. Even if your child never sets foot in a public school. Even if you’re educating them at home or sending them to a private institution. You’re still taxed to support a system that presumes you unfit and overrides your rights.

This is not just about poor outcomes. Yes, public education often fails to teach children to read or calculate, even after years of standards, reforms, and record funding. But that’s not the central issue.

The central issue is this: the system violates your rights. And it does so under the guise of benevolence, of progress, of social good.

And now, school choice is being sold as the solution — but it doesn’t solve the problem. It expands it. School choice doesn’t restore your rights. It entrenches the state’s role. It simply lets you satisfy your legal obligations in a slightly different way, with a different set of government-approved options — and with more oversight, not less.

It’s not liberation. It’s rebranding.

Why I'm an Abolitionist

When I say I’m an education abolitionist, this is what I mean.

I don’t believe the government has the right to override your parental authority without due process. I don’t believe your child should be subject to ideological programming in a state-mandated environment. I don’t believe you should be taxed to fund a system you didn’t choose and may even object to on principle.

The existence of bad parents does not justify treating every parent as one.

We don’t abolish rights because someone might abuse them. We don’t eliminate speech because someone might say something hateful. We don’t ban due process because someone might be guilty. And we should not accept compulsory schooling — with all of its constitutional violations — just because some parents might fall short.

We’ve accepted this system for so long, we’ve stopped questioning it. And that’s exactly how it was designed.

It’s time to start asking hard questions. It’s time to recognize the cost.It’s time to stop pretending that freedom and compulsion can coexist.

Get full access to The Reason We Learn at thereasonwelearn.substack.com/subscribe

Educated into Compliance: The Constitutional Case Against Compulsory Schooling