House Bill 5979 would require school districts and intermediate school districts in Michigan to allow eligible nonpublic pupils, including homeschool students, to participate in extracurricular activities offered by public schools in their district. The bill covers interscholastic athletics, clubs, performing arts, and other school-sponsored activities that are not part of the required instructional program. It generally bars districts and outside governing bodies such as athletic associations or conferences from excluding nonpublic pupils solely because they are not enrolled in the public school.
The bill allows districts to impose the same conduct, attendance, disciplinary, tryout, and selection standards that apply to enrolled pupils, and it permits districts to verify academic eligibility through a portfolio, standardized test, or parent affidavit. Districts may charge participation fees up to the amount charged to enrolled pupils, but they may not require nonpublic pupils to enroll in classes as a condition of participation and are not required to provide transportation. The bill also limits the use of capacity restrictions, requiring that any cap be documented in advance, applied equally, and based on objective criteria rather than used to exclude nonpublic pupils.
HB5979 would amend the Revised School Code by adding a new section governing access to extracurricular activities for nonpublic pupils. It would create a statewide right for homeschool and private school students who reside in a district to participate in public school extracurricular programs, subject to specified eligibility and conduct requirements. The bill also adds reporting obligations for districts and the Department of Education, requires public posting of denial data, and authorizes civil enforcement, including injunctive relief, damages, attorney fees, and a civil fine of up to $15,000 per violation.
No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of legislative debate or formal support/opposition in the available record. Based on the bill text, the measure appears designed to expand access and reduce barriers for nonpublic students, suggesting a generally pro-participation and pro-parent-choice policy approach. The inclusion of reporting and enforcement provisions indicates an intent to ensure compliance rather than leave participation decisions entirely to local discretion.
The likely points of contention are the balance between access for nonpublic pupils and local control over school activities. School districts and athletic associations may object to the mandate to admit nonpublic pupils, especially where teams or activities have limited slots, while supporters would likely argue that the bill prevents exclusion based on school enrollment status. Another possible area of dispute is the enforcement structure, including civil lawsuits, attorney fees, and fines, which could be viewed as strong penalties for districts. Questions may also arise over academic eligibility verification, fee parity, and whether districts should be required to accommodate students who are not otherwise enrolled in the public system.