 |
State-By-State Analysis |
|
|
|
 |
Released Time Laws and Guidelines for
Ohio
Updated July 2009
|
|
|
|
SUMMARY for Ohio
|
|
General Information
|
Ohio, like many other states does not have specific laws regarding Released Time. However, this does not necessarily prohibit Released Time. In fact, it may allow a wider range of Released Time programs. Since Ohio does not have specific laws regarding Released Time, a Released Time program in Ohio would fall subject to the federal guideposts presented in McCollum v. Board of Education, 333 U.S. 203 (1948), Zorach v. Clauson, 343 U.S. 306 (1952), and Grand Rapids School District v. Ball, 473 U.S. 373 (1985).
In summary, the above cases present three general requirements for Released Time programs: 1) The state cannot fund Released Time directly or indirectly. This prohibits not only funds themselves but also any support or benefit from anything purchased or anyone compensated by state funds; 2) Released Time programs cannot take place on school premises; and 3) Participation in Released Time programs must be voluntary. There cannot be any coercion, encouragement, or discouragement on the part of any school official. However, these three points are not exclusive. One should conduct thorough research on the latest federal and state case law to see whether your state or federal circuit has its own case law supplementing the requirements in McCollum, Zorach, and Ball.
|
|
Department of Education Website
|
Ohio Department of Education
Website: http://www.ode.state.oh.us/
|
|
DETAILS for Ohio
|
|
Statutes
|
OHIO REVISED CODE
Ohio compulsory attendance law requires that all children, ages 7-15 (inclusive) must attend public school "or to otherwise cause him to be instructed in accordance with the law." OHIO REV. CODE ANN. § 3321.03 .
The local board of education of a county school district, in addition, "may prescribe the authority by which and the manner in which any child may be excused for absence" from the public schools "for good and sufficient reasons" OHIO REV. CODE ANN. § 3321.04(C) . This authority to establish rules for excusing students may be used to establish Released Time programs for public school students to receive religious instruction.
No express statutes permitting or prohibiting Released Time exist in Ohio.
|
|
Regulations
|
Excusing children for religious instruction is left to the discretion of each local school board.
|
|
Attorney General
|
When confronted with a religiously-based request for exemption from compulsory school attendance under RC Sec. 3321.04, the local superintendent of schools must apply the three-prong test enumerated in Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 US 205 (1972) and adopted by the Ohio Supreme Court in State v. Whisner 47 OS2d 181, 1 OO3d 105 (1976)namely: (1) are the religious beliefs sincere? (2) will application of the compulsory school law infringe on the constitutional right to free exercise of religion? (3) does the state have an interest of sufficient magnitude to override the claim of violation of the right to free exercise of religion? If the parent can meet the first two prongs of the test, and if the state fails to meet the third, the exemption must be granted. Pursuant to RC Secs. 3313.60 and 3321.04, a local board of education may prescribe the course of study for children excused from compulsory school attendance. RC Sec. 3321.01 vests the local superintendent of schools with the authority to determine whether a child of compulsory school age may be excused from compulsory school attendance; a determination that a child may be excuses must be based upon a judgment by the superintendent that the program of home education proposed for the child will satisfy applicable requirements. OAG No. 79-056 (1979).
|
|
Case Law
|
Moore v. Board of Education 212 N.E. ad 833 (1965)
The Court of Common Pleas of Ohio held that a particular Released Time religious program maintained by the Board of Education resulted in the establishment of one particular religion (Catholic) and thus violated the U.S. Constitution. The Released Time program was conducted for one hour per day, 5 days a week, on public school grounds and was taught by public school teachers. The court determined that such a program had the effect of providing sectarian instructions to public school children at public expense (Moore at 841). One religious sect, to the exclusion of all others, is the recipient of instruction in its religious faith through this Released Time program (Moore at 844). In conclusion, the Court emphasized that these particular Released Time programs made the public schools nothing more than "instruments for securing attendance at denominational classes." (Moore, at 844).
The court relied heavily on McCollum v. Board of Education, 333 U.S. 203, and the Zorach v. Clauson, 343 U.S. 306, using their tests for determining the proper Released Time program. As a result, although the specific Released Time program involved in Moore was ruled unconstitutional, the court implied that a Released Time program which conforms with Zorach may be operated in Ohio. A Released Time program is constitutional if it takes place off public school property, is not financed by public funds, and is not taught by public school teachers.
|
|
|
|
|