If Levi Meir Levi (also known as Levi Clancy) had stayed in public school, the taxpayers would be paying $7,000 or more a year for his education. Instead, diagnosed as “profoundly gifted,” he left at the age of 7 to start college. Now 14, Levi is a junior pre-med at UCLA, where he works as a math tutor. He hopes to become a cancer researcher. He and his single mother, a part-time public school art teacher, are
sueing the school district, claiming that his education costs should be covered, just as the district would have to pay for a disabled child who couldn’t be taught adequately in a normal school. I think she’s got a case.
The complaint filed with a California superior court in Sacramento points to the state’s compulsory-education law requiring “a free and equal education” for all minors until age 18.
. . . The complaint says the taxpayer-funded public-school system owed Miss Levi and her son other school options and should have paid for his college costs under state law, or at least paid as much as the public-school district’s yearly per-pupil expenditure.
. . . “[Levi] Clancy has a fundamental constitutional interest in receiving an education that is non-discriminatory and provides for his individualized needs,” the complaint states. “UCLA is capable of providing the education for him. However, neither he nor his mother can afford to pay for this education.”
In response, the California Department of Education’s attorney has asked the state superior court to dismiss the suit “and to order Levi returned to a public secondary school.” Why not prison?
Levi blogs at LeviLevi.com.