Can private schools expel children for their parents' behavior?
Should parents have more rights to sue private schools for expelling their children over things the parents did or said? And if so, what kind of precedent would that set — not only for private education in North Carolina, but for any business kicking out an irate customer?
Those questions came before North Carolina’s highest court Wednesday as they heard arguments in a case brought by a conservative political activist whose children were booted from a prestigious North Carolina private school while the parent fought with school administrators over Covid-era mask requirements and the school's actions surrounding the Black Lives Matter movement.
Doug Turpin and his wife Nicole Turpin allege that Charlotte Latin School engaged in cancel culture against their beliefs, unfairly targeting their children in retaliation. The couple sued the school over allegations of libel, slander, fraud and a violation of the state’s Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Act, among other claims.
The case has broader business and political implications beyond simply the education of two children — and has resonated from Charlotte to Raleigh and Washington, D.C.
Multiple members of Congress and the state legislature received permission from the state Supreme Court to weigh in on the case. So did the Catholic Church, groups that represent private schools, groups that advocate for educational reform and others.
Doug Turpin is a Charlotte-area businessman who also leads Coalition for Liberty, which advocates for “woke-free education” and fights on behalf of people it believes have been unfairly accused of being racist. “Everyday Americans should not fear the loss of their job or social standing for stating an opinion that does not toe the radical progressive line,” the group’s website says.
In recent years the Turpins have given at least tens of thousands of dollars to Republican politicians and groups, state and federal records show. They received support in this case through “friend of the court” briefs — each urging a ruling in their favor — from U.S. Reps. Tim Moore, Pat Harrigan and Richard Hudson, all Republicans representing North Carolina in Congress. Several GOP members of the state legislature have also weighed in, as have conservative groups such as Moms For Liberty.
On the other side, standing with Charlotte Latin, are local and regional branches of the Catholic Church and the Association of Independent Schools. They say private schools need to have the ability to choose who is or isn’t allowed to attend without facing a costly lawsuit over every expulsion or application denial.
The Turpins lost in Mecklenburg County Superior Court after a judge prevented the case from going to trial, ruling that they failed to make valid legal claims. The Turpins appealed that decision and lost again at the state Court of Appeals.
They’re hoping the North Carolina Supreme Court, which has a 5-2 Republican majority, reverses those decisions and lets them go to trial. Their various claims against Charlotte Latin could net the family a financial windfall if a jury sides with them.
There’s also reputation at stake. If each side is accusing the other of harming their reputation, Turpin attorney Chris Edwards told justices Wednesday, “that's something that the conscience of the community — the jury — needs to figure out.”
Charlotte Latin disagrees. Even if the school ends up winning at trial, its lawyer told justices, the damage from simply allowing a trial to be held would still be immense. It would create “a potential tort minefield” not just for every private school in the state, attorney Jennifer Van Zant said, but for any business that might want to stop associating with customers who refuse to follow its rules.
A ruling in favor of the Turpins would encourage more parents to sue their schools — and eventually water down the quality that parents expect when they pay to send their children to private schools, Van Zant predicted.
“If a private school cannot exercise its contractual right in the relationship without fear of tort liability, the private schools would turn into vanilla, one-size-fits-all experiences that avoid offending everyone and end up pleasing no one,” she said.
GOP stance on private school rights
Many of the same Republican politicians who support the Turpins and wish to see Charlotte Latin possibly be punished have taken seemingly opposite stances in state political debates, particularly over North Carolina’s private school voucher system.
Over the past decade Republicans have ramped up state spending on private schools, allocating billions of taxpayer dollars to subsidize families’ tuition bills.
Democrats in the state legislature have argued that private schools receiving taxpayer money should be banned from expelling or refusing to admit students based on the students’ sexual identities, political views or religious beliefs, or those of their parents. Republicans have repeatedly rebuffed those suggestions.
In a court brief signed by numerous Republican politicians — including Moore, Harrigan, North Carolina House Speaker Destin Hall and other state lawmakers — they say they still agree that private schools should have wide freedom to deny or expel students. But the Turpins’ case is different, they say, and the court should rule in the family’s favor in this one specific case.
They say the Turpins were just trying to raise “fact-based” criticisms of diversity, equity and inclusion efforts at the school and shouldn’t have been targeted for that.
“The Turpins’ claims in no way limit the freedom of private schools to determine their own curriculum, culture or admissions policies,” the Republican politicians’ brief says. “Instead, this case is about a school that engaged in misrepresentations, silenced critical parents, and then labeled them as racists for asking questions about their children’s education.”
The court didn’t immediately issue a decision after oral arguments Wednesday. Rulings frequently come within several months of a case being heard.
Other education cases
Education is a common theme for the Supreme Court this month.
Next week, a case out of Richmond County could determine whether the money people pay for citations of “improper equipment” — the charge that speeding drivers are often allowed to plead down to in courts across the state — should go directly to public schools.
And when the justices convened Wednesday for the Charlotte Latin case, they also considered a case out of Alamance County. The school district there is accused of violating the state constitution’s guarantee of quality public education — by employing a middle school teacher whose teaching license had allegedly been expired for years, and who faced accusations of physical abuse.
The lawsuit was brought by the guardian of an 11-year-old girl who claimed the teacher grabbed the girl by the hair and repeatedly slammed her head into the ground, in front of a classroom full of other students, after the girl hit the teacher in her arm.