The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Can a Public School Ask Students to State their Religion?
Overzealous school administrators should think about students' privacy rights.
Last month, at the end of a three-year saga, the U.S. Department of Education ruled on a complaint that New Jersey parents had filed against the Cedar Grove School District. The conflict is interesting for what it suggests about overreaching school administrators and about the capacity of persistent parents who believe their kids' rights have been violated to get things done.
Back in 2021, without giving parents prior notice, the district surveyed elementary, middle and high school students about a variety of sensitive topics, including the students' gender identity, race, ethnicity and, in the case of high school students, religious affiliation. The district argued that it was collecting the students' information confidentially in the interests of promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion.
When they learned about the surveys, many parents objected. One of those parents was my colleague at St. John's Law, Patricia Montana. As she recounts in a recent Legal Spirits podcast, with a little research, she discovered that the surveys violated several state and federal privacy laws, including, with respect to the question about religious affiliation, the federal Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment, or PPRA. The PPRA requires a school district that wishes to survey students on certain subjects, including religious affiliation, to notify parents in advance and allow parents an opportunity to opt their children out of participation.
The district didn't act on the parents' complaints, so the parents contacted the NJ and US Departments of Education for help. The NJ authorities quickly sided with the parents and ordered the district to destroy the results of the surveys. The US DOE delayed giving an answer, for reasons that are unclear, so Montana and the parents sued. Last month, US DOE finally ruled—again, in favor of the parents. The US DOE ordered the district to train its employees so that violations of the PPRA's parental notification and opt-out provision do not occur again (and to provide documentation of such training) and, in future, to notify parents of their rights under the PPRA.
This is a fascinating story for a couple of reasons. First, it shows how overzealous school administrators can be so sure of their own good faith that they ignore basic privacy concerns. How could the administrators have thought it was wise to ask students about their religious affiliations? Just as the state has no business forbidding students from holding and expressing religious beliefs, it has no business asking students to reveal their beliefs. Even if surveys are anonymous—and Montana and the other parents were skeptical about how anonymous they were—students could legitimately feel uncomfortable revealing such sensitive information to school authorities. Plus, asking about religious affiliation, at least without advance notice to parents, is illegal—which the school administrators should have known.
Second, the story shows that parents can prevail against school bureaucracies. True, some of the parents' success here resulted from the serendipitous fact that one of them just happened to be a lawyer, who saw that what the district had done was illegal. That won't always be the case, of course. But with luck and persistence, it is possible to win an important battle every now and then. That's worth remembering as another school year begins.
You can listen to my podcast with Professor Montana here.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
They can ask race, gender, and a host of other attributes which are none of their business, or they can tell you what yours is. I don't see any difference in tabulating religion. It's all anti-bigotry to fight bigotry, isn't it?
Just more Stupid Government Tricks.
It's all going on your Permanent Record, kids.
"The US DOE delayed giving an answer, for reasons that are unclear..." verrrry interesting.
It's ED, not DOE because that's Energy.
and neither Department produces any of either.
I've certainly learned a lot from their shenanigans.
Actually, DOE and not DOD control our nukes and those, if ever used, would produce a LOT of energy….
Nukes is a big part of DOE's responsibility.
Dr. Ed 2 is correct! Man, I was not alarmed at wars and rumors of wars, earthquakes, famines, pestilence, but that is a frightening sign.
If a student or the student’s parents raise a religious objection to something at school, can the school ask about the student’s religion even though the school probably wouldn’t be able to say, for example, “You’ve told us you’re Catholic, and Catholic doctrine doesn’t rule out COVID vaccinations”?
Once the parent asserts it, I don't see what justification the school could have for questioning the student about it further. That seems like more of an intrusion than an anonymous survey.
A religious objection wouldn't have to adhere to any specific doctrine to be valid, either. It just has to be sincerely held, at least in every application I've read about.
I could see, maybe, asking PARENTS about religion so to be sensitive to holidays.
But you have to respect parents to do that...
"If a student or the student’s parents raise a religious objection to something at school, can the school ask about the student’s religion"
No.
"You’ve told us you’re Catholic, and Catholic doctrine doesn’t rule out COVID vaccinations"
That's a major reason why no. There's a big problem when government starts telling people what their own religious doctrine is, then making judgements based on it. Would you like some examples of how this goes wildly wrong?
“You’ve told us you’re Catholic, and Catholic doctrine doesn’t rule out COVID vaccinations” doesn't work in the first place. Under US precedents, it is not the court's place to get in the middle of doctrinal arguments between religious authorities or even between an alleged authority and an individual believer.
If you say that you are a Catholic and that you must only pray while wearing yellow polka dot underwear on your head, it doesn't matter that your parish priest or even the Pope himself says differently. The only doctrinal test is whether your belief is sincerely held.
So no, that can not be a legitimate basis to ask someone to disclose their religious affiliation.
The district argued that it was collecting the students' information confidentially in the interests of promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion.
IOW ... for the purpose of discrimination.
So…kick a kid out because of a particular religion if their quotas are out of alignment?
Or race or whatever -- Asian attendance "magically" increased at MIKT after SCOTUS told them to cut out the discrimination.
Schools/government have no business delving into the sex lives of children either (if they even have one.)
I just got a nosy questionnaire somewhat like this from the local public school, and sure enough, it claims to be "confidential". I do not know what they mean by that, as they do not describe any limits on use of the data.
I can understand the concerns, including that it is not truly anonymous, but it is not outrageous in principle that a school wants to know the basic characteristics of its students.
A school needs to address the needs of a diverse student body. They have to address a range of interests, including the religious needs of the student body. This requires a good amount of finesse and care. Knowing the size of various communities would help.
The privacy and notification rules are sound but a somewhat libertarian-leaning blog might have some empathy with schools not being able to adequately keep track of all of the guidelines. Clearly, some federal regulation of schools are deemed suitable.
What 'religious needs' does a local public school district have to address?
If you've got a lot of Jewish students, maybe make sure you have pork free options in the cafeteria. Lots of Catholics, fish on Fridays.
Although you could just ask about food preferences directly.
Or you could just wait until students/parents raise concerns about the school's effect on their religious practices/beliefs and react accordingly.
That's what I was going to say.
Students have a range of religious beliefs that affect school affairs including prayer (Muslims pray five times a day), clothing, sometimes parental opposition to vaccines, concern about certain curricula (opt-outs from certain school readings or projects), dealing with bullying and other things against certain religions, educating students about minority religions practiced by fellow students, etc.
Reference is made to possibly asking individuals about food preferences. School districts have lots of students. Trying to do that individually for a range of things can be difficult.
So, institutions also keep track of groups of people who have certain general needs.
Few if any of those would be addressed by surveying the students, as opposed to parents — and none of them would be helped by asking, "What religion is your child?" as opposed to "What accommodations do you want/need for your child?"
As Fred G Sanford told his son Lamont, when Lamont wanted to changed his name to a made-up African one, so people would know he was Black.
"Son, your name could be Spiro T. Agnew and people would still know you were Black, all they have to do is look at you"
Frank
No it doesn't need to address the needs of a diverse student body. It needs to address the needs of students, period. Their diversity is no more important than it is to a gas station.
The school shouldn't ask about "the students' gender identity, race, ethnicity" anymore than their religion.
So asking elementary school children about their gender identity is cool but such dangerous topics as religion have to wait to high school? It's not hard to see this as just a tactic to confuse and even groom impressionable young children into a specific mode of thought.
A right to privacy ? I found that a weak argument in law school, even more so in this context.
Please cite your source for the right to privacy of which you speak.
I'll get you started, "The Griswold decision acknowledged that the Bill of Rights contained “zones of privacy” from the government within the First, Third, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments. Combined with the Ninth Amendment, which acknowledges the existence of some constitutional rights that are not explicitly mentioned in the Bill of Rights, and the Fourteenth Amendment, which states that the government cannot infringe upon “life, liberty, or property” without the “due process of law,” the Supreme Court declared that there is a constitutional right to privacy within the “penumbra,” or shadow, of these protections. Griswold set a precedent for numerous privacy-related cases over the past six decades, including Roe v. Wade (1973) and Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992)." https://www.csis.org/analysis/what-privacy-united-states-could-look-without-roe-v-wade
The OP cites statutory privacy rights. It also raises the concern of a general "right" to privacy, which is not necessarily only something constitutionally based. It can be a general policy concern.
There are constitutional aspects to privacy, including those arising from the religious liberty components of the First Amendment.
Let’s say you’re an NAACP member in Jim Crow Alabama. Would you like your political affiliation to be kept private from the government? The Supreme Court, if I recall aright, sided with people in that situation, affirming a right of political privacy which unpopular organizations, can assert on behalf of their members if the latter risk retaliation for their membership.
Imagine if the Schools put as much effort into teaching Science and Math, (And yes, maybe Engrish, as I've been told countless times, I don't write good Engrish) as this Bullshit. And I'm guessing the students who answered "None of your fucking Business" didn't get Smily faces on their survey forms
Frank
“First, it shows how overzealous school administrators can be so sure of their own good faith that they ignore basic privacy concerns.”
This reminds me of the school system in suburban Philadelphia about 15 years ago that never considered there might be privacy concerns — legal or ethical — when they turned on cameras on school-issued laptops when the students were in their bedrooms.
“The judge issued an order in May, requiring school officials to arrange for 40 high school students and their parents to see the images taken secretly from their laptops.” Ultimately, over 60,000 images were recovered.
This should give us some pause about how K-12 systems are using surveillance software like Gaggle and Lightspeed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robbins_v._Lower_Merion_School_District
The fact they had to go to court to get those records is outrageous. Basic FERPA law - you get to see your children's educational records, all of them, upon demand, full stop, period.
While there may be laws on the books, it’s by no means clear to me why these laws exist. We don’t generally regard students’ race or sex as a purely private matter. Indeed, Title IX has often been interpreted as REQUIRING collecting such information. How can the feds know if a school is complying with the descrimination laws if the school can’t even say what the racial or gender composition of its student body is. And state laws that purport to prohibit colloection of this information may well be preempted by federal law.
Why should religion be any different? It gets the same treatment in federal discrimination law as race or sex. So how can it be unlawful to collect information relevant to assessing compliance?
Was a survey checkbox provided for the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster?