(1) The Supreme Court has consistently ruled that "The liberty of the Constitution forbids the standardization of children by compelling them to attend public school instmction only." Mr. Justice McReynolds in Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510 (1925). This means that parents or guardians have the right to choose whether their child(ren) will attend public or private schools.

(2) The Tennessee Code ensures the rights of students to transfer from public to private schools and vice versa. "The state board of education and local boards of education shall not prohibit or impede the transfer of a student from a church-related school to a public school of this state." (T.C.A. 49-50-801(c); see also T.C.A. 49-6-3001(4)).

(3) lf the state does not have the right to compel a student to attend a public, accredited, or approved school, then it does not have the right to penalize a student for choosing to attend a non-public, non-accredited, or non-approved school. "Rights guaranteed by the Constitution may not be abridged by state legislation that has no reasonable relation to some purpose within the competency of the state." (McReynolds, op. cit.)

(4) Please note the word "reasonable" in the above quote. While the state has the right to formulate mles for the orderly transfer of students from public to ptivate schools and vice versa, these rules must be contextually reasonable. Since this context deals with education, the rules formulated by the state for this situation must be reasonable within this context and such as are required by the nature of the case.

(5) A number of public colleges in Tennessee require a GED diploma of students who have diplomas from non-approved high schools but not from students with diplomas from public or approved schools. Since the GED exam is designed to test one's academic knowledge and skills, the only valid reason for requiring the GED from one special group of applicants would necessarily have to be academic in nature However, there is no valid, statisical evidence to indicate that students from non-approved high schools are any less prepared to begin college work than their counterparts from public schools. In fact, vatious studies have consistently indicated that the reverse is tme and that students from private schools (including non-approved schools) do as well or better on every type of standardized test than students from public schools (see, for example, Private Schools in the flnited States: A Statistical Profile, t990-91; National Center for Education statistics: Statistical Analysis Report: January 1995; U.S. Dept. Of Education, NCES-95-330).

(6) Since there is no valid, academic reason for this specialized requirement, it must be seen as arbitrary, unreasonable, and not in the public interest. It is analagous to a "poll tax" which, when formerly disenfranchised persons were given the right to vote, sought to abrogate that right by putting unreasonable barriers in the path of those who sought to exercise their right. The analogy is more apt than one might think since the GED exam requires a fee of twenty-five dollars plus expense and time for preparation and travel to testing sites. Students who choose, therefore, to exercise their Constitutional right to attend the school of their choice are being unreasonably hindered &om attending public colleges and even "taxed" (by the requirement for extra and unnecessary exams) when they attempt to enter such public institutions.