Unlawful to discrimate against graduates of unaccredited schools?

I was satisfying my morbid curiosity at www.cula.edu when I came across this astonishing statement at http://www.cula.edu/pg.asp?idCategory=102:

It is well for the general public to take note: THE ACT OF ACCEPTING A GRADUATE SOLELY BECAUSE THE SCHOOL ATTENDED WAS ACCREDITED OR UNACCREDITED, AND NOT BECAUSE THE ALUMNUS IS QUALIFIED IS DEEMED TO BE AN UNLAWFUL ACT OF PRACTICING "STATUS DISCRIMINATION," PUNISHABLE UNDER THE U.S. CONSTITUTION, UNDER THE LAWS OF STATES, AND UNDER THE RULES OF THE GENEVA CONVENTION/WORLD COURT AT THE HAGUE.​

I was pretty surprised to see the Geneva Convention cited because I just finished "The Law of War" at the National Guard Professional Education Center so I know that the Geneva Conventions (there are four) concern the treatment during war of wounded, civilians, shipwrecked and prisoners of war, not individual claims of discrimination.

Anyway, I thought I would research the matter a bit.

I found only one case on point in US law:

LUPERT v. The CALIFORNIA STATE BAR, et al., United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, May 23, 1985, 25 Ed. Law Rep. 91; 761 F.2d 1325

Plaintiff claimed that forcing students from unaccredited law schools to take the "Baby Bar", while students of accredited schools do not, was a violation of the "equal protection" clause of the Constitution.

The Court rejected plaintiffs claim that the distinction in treatment between accredited and non-accredited is subject to "strict scrutiny". Strict scrutiny of a law is employed when a "fundamental right" is at issue or the the law impacts a "suspect class".

Instead, the Court applied the "rational relationship test "where that the distinctions drawn bear some rational relationship to a conceivable legitimate state purpose." Of course the law passes this test (Hint to law students: a law NEVER survives strict scrutiny and a law is NEVER struck down for lacking a rational relationship. In other words, the test applied determines the outcome.

I thought I would look at the treatment of unaccredited home-schooled children. Here we're getting closer to a fundamental right, because the right to raise your kids the way you want is pretty fundamental. Also, home-schoolers are a well-organized and politically powerful bunch so they should have some weight in getting laws passed that favor them.

I found one case on point: Vandiver v. Hardin County Board of Education, 925 F.2d 927 (6th Cir. 1990). Here, the Court rejected both equal protection and religious freedom challenges to the school princial's descretion to require testing on a home-schooled child.

Many states have statutes which permit discrimination against the unaccredited home-schooled. For example

Kansas http://www.ksde.org/Default.aspx?tabid=1688

If a student transfers from a nonaccredited school to an accredited school, the accredited school is not required to accept the transfer of credit. The accredited school may find it necessary to test the student in order to make a decision regarding the transfer of credit.​

Colleges and universities determine their own criteria for admission of students who graduate from a nonaccredited school.​

This is not an exhaustive study of this subject. However, I make this conclusion: the statement on the CULA website claiming that discrimination against graduates of unaccredited schools in unlawful discrimination, is false.

 

Even if it is, I think the keyword there is "solely."

 

There should be some kind of law that allows only accredited schools (NA or RA) to have a .edu domain.

 

discrimination

No, you are mistaken. It is quite lawful to discriminate against people solely because they have degrees from unaccredited institutions.

 

.edu domains have been limited to accredited institutions since 2001. However, if a .edu domain was registered before this rule started in 2001, they are allowed to keep their old .edu domain.

An example of a completely unaccredited school with a .edu domain is www.tyndale.edu ... meanwhile, my own alma mater (which is accredited by both ATS and ABHE among others) has the domain www.tyndale.ca

 

That's why I said, "even if it is."

 

There is. You cannot get a .edu domain unless you are accredited. Those domain names that are used by bogus/unaccredited schools were bought before the regulation.