Receive stories similar to these directly in your email.
Over 40 education advocacy groups have joined forces to combat enduring residency regulations that bind children to their local public schools instead of enabling them to transfer to potentially more suitable educational institutions.
Their objective is to eliminate what they perceive as “discriminatory public school district boundary lines” across all 50 states by 2030.
Previous attempts to tackle this issue are viewed as inadequate and ineffective. While some states allowed students to transfer within their school district, only 19 states and the District of Columbia permitted transfers outside the district. However, many programs are dependent on the receiving schools’ discretion, requiring approval from the student’s home district or imposing tuition fees on families seeking a transfer.
Moreover, some programs lack provisions for parents to appeal decisions.
Tim DeRoche, the president of Available to All, a member of the coalition, criticized the existing open enrollment laws as severely flawed and limited, emphasizing their deliberate constraints in numerous states.
Advocates of comprehensive open enrollment laws highlight a survey of 1,000 individuals nationwide, showing that two-thirds support allowing a child to attend any public school within the state. This concept resonated particularly well with Black respondents, with 76% expressing favorability.
Leading the initiative is a Charles organization that advocates for expanding learning opportunities, including school choice. Coalition members engage with policymakers, publish reports on state laws that penalize parents for using addresses other than their own to enroll their children in public schools, and propose solutions to address the enduring effects of redlining—a practice from decades ago that contributed to current education disparities and zoning restrictions.
Jorge Elorza, the chief executive officer of Democrats for Education Reform, emphasized the importance of children having the freedom to pursue education in schools that cater to their needs.
To advance this cause, the organization is collaborating with legislators in South Carolina.
The group’s chief operating officer highlighted Idaho’s recent efforts to broaden opportunities for children to attend their preferred schools. In Idaho, parents currently need to apply for a transfer, with priority given to those within the home district. However, school officials may reject requests based on certain criteria.
Similar challenges against zoning regulations have emerged in various parts of the country, such as New Jersey, where organizations like the Latino Action Network and NAACP raised concerns about residency requirements disproportionately affecting Black and Latino students. Legal actions have been taken in response to these issues.
Critics of open enrollment laws fear that they may deplete underperforming schools of their top-performing students. However, coalition members argue that not all families opt to transfer their children from struggling schools, even when given the opportunity.
While students who feel supported by their teachers often choose to stay, strong open enrollment policies can incentivize public schools to enhance their offerings or specialize to attract students.
Arizona’s public schools, known for having some of the least restrictive open enrollment policies in the nation, have benefited from this approach for years.
A member of the coalition shared a personal anecdote about his family’s efforts to secure a better education for him by navigating the system to enroll in a magnet school outside their designated zone. However, he acknowledged that not all families have the same advantages or understanding of the education system.
He emphasized that school choice is often accessible to affluent families, leaving others behind, some of whom may resort to breaking the law to secure better educational opportunities for their children—a risky decision with potential legal consequences.
One such case involved Kelley Williams-Bolar, who faced legal repercussions in 2011 for enrolling her daughters in a school outside their zoned area. She argued that parents should not be penalized for seeking better educational prospects for their children.
Amidst these challenges, advocates call for a reevaluation of existing rules governing school admissions to ensure that every child has access to quality education.
Disclosure: Yes. Every Kid. operates as part of the broader Stand Together Trust network. Stand Together Trust receives financial backing from the Carnegie Corporation of New York, Walton Family Foundation, and Nellie Mae Education Foundation, which also support 50CAN. Additionally, T. Campbell Brown serves on the board of directors for 50CAN and is a co-founder of_.