UNJUSTLY USURPING THE PARENTAL RIGHT: Fields v. Palmdale School District, 427 F.3d 1197 (9th Cir. 2005)

The right of a parent to control his child's upbringing is one of the few fundamental rights recognized by courts as protected under the doctrine of substantive due process.1 Rooted in vague pronouncements made in two cases decided in the 1920s, Meyer v. Nebraska2 and Pierce v. Society of Sisters,3

this amorphous parental right has never been clearly defined by the Supreme Court.4 This lack of guidance has proven especially troublesome in the context of public schools where parents have attempted to shield their children from school mandates ranging from dress codes5 to sex education.6 Were parental rights to dominate school interests, public education would become untenable, as each parent would effectively hold veto power over the school's curriculum. Thus, many courts have envisioned the Meyer-Pierce right as a balance between the competing interests of the parents and the schools.7 Yet not until Fields v. Pahndnle School District8 did a federal appellate court establish a bright-line rule for parental rights claims relating to a public school's actions.