Tanya’s experience is not unique. Our legal team has heard similar stories over the years from other NYC families trying to begin homeschooling.

A Texas court protected HSLDA members from CPS investigators’ fishing expedition, saying the department’s “responsibility to protect children from abusive parents does not authorize the state to oversee the internal affairs of every family.”

Tanya had done everything right—filing paperwork and following the homeschool law of New York City. Imagine her shock when a Child Protective Services investigator came to her apartment because of a report of “educational neglect.”

A Virginia school district admits to state supreme court justices that it planned to prosecute a homeschool family over a made-up policy.

The father of an 18-year-old who is still homeschooling dragged everyone back into court to object to a ruling that he pay child support.

Professor Bartholet seems to feel that our effective advocacy has been underhanded in some way, referring to the "notorious Jonathan L. case in California." What exactly happened during that fateful case in 2008?

A notice of intent to provide home instruction is effective the very minute it is transmitted to the superintendent, assuming it contains everything the law requires.

HSLDA is responding to a major challenge in our quest to deliver justice for Kentucky homeschool mom Holly Curry in her federal lawsuit.

A federal judge has ruled that Josiah and Holly Curry will get their day in court. Reacting to the investigator’s testimony that “she should ‘automatically’ strip-search any child who was four or under,” the judge made it clear he disagreed.

The court’s ruling in Gary B. v. Whitmer has the potential to bring the legal theories of Bartholet to life, endangering homeschooling freedom. We’ve submitted an amicus brief as we work to reverse this dangerous precedent.