Neoconservative Causes and the Courts: Explaining Homeschooling Litigation Trends, 1972-2007

• In Event: 036 - Section on Sociology of Law Paper Session. Legal Mobilization and Institutional Politics

Abstract

Since the legalization of homeschooling in 1972 (Wisconsin v. Yoder), adversaries on both sides have launched a number of court challenges with significant long-term impact on the legal frameworks regulating homeschooling. Initially perceived as a fringe movement, these court challenges helped mainstream homeschooling as an important policy issue. In this paper, we adjudicate between theoretical claims rooted in the sociology of education and social movement literatures to examine whether homeschooling litigation trends reflect public concerns over changing educational practices and policies or changing cultural and political dynamics.
We employ a unique longitudinal, state-level dataset (1972-2007) on precedent-setting state and federal court cases during this period. Analyses show that homeschooling litigation trends remained largely unaffected by changing educational practices, except insofar as they signal intensifying status competition dynamics, primarily operating through suspension and segregation practices. Instead, we find that litigation trends primarily reflect political and cultural factors, including the countervailing effects of liberalization of public attitudes versus liberalization among political elites. Likewise, mobilization and counter-mobilization of homeschooling adversaries have played a central role in driving homeschooling litigation. In addition, our analyses suggest a fruitful alternative to conceptualizing legal mobilization as a two-stage process that begins with having movement claims reach the court’s docket.

Authors

• Regina E. Werum, University of Nebraska-Lincoln

• Steven A. Boutcher, University of Massachusetts-Amherst