The Romeikes are being represented by the Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA).
The Supreme Court appeal follows a major setback. The Obama administration sued the Romeikes to remove their asylum that had been granted in 2010. President Obama obtained his desired verdict from the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Uwe and Hannelore Romeike are committed Christians and parents of six children. Their beliefs include educating their own children. Unfortunately, home-schooling is against the law in Germany.
Back in 2008, the German government threatened legal action if the Romeiikes continued with their stand. They decided to flee to America and ended up in Tennessee.
At first it worked. Asylum was obtained from by a US judge. Then President Obama’s Justice Department decided to interfere and the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals backed them up. Their ruling stated that Germany’s ban on home-schooling could not actually be called “persecution” and therefore did not qualify as a reason for political asylum.
Supposedly, financial retribution and threats of losing custody of your own children are not to be viewed as persecution. Germany’s “non-persecution” of Christian freedom has been going on since 1918, when school attendance was made a matter of law.
Speaking to ABC News, Michael Farris, the Romeike family’s attorney and the chairman of the Home School Legal Defense Association, said, “We are very disappointed in the decision by the Sixth Circuit to deny political asylum to the Romeike family who wants the freedom to home-school their children…The decision of the court fails to even discuss the unchallenged evidence of Germany’s motive in banning homeschooling. The German Supreme Court says that they want to suppress religious and philosophical minorities.”
Evidently Germany’s court is not the only one where Farris smells an agenda. He also suspects an unstated motive beyond the Sixth Circuit Court’s stated decision. “I can’t think of any reason other than bias against Christians and homeschoolers…I have vowed to fight to the very end on this, this is an injustice of a significant magnitude.”
Another possible reason for the court decision was offered by Karla McKanders, a refugee law expert at the University of Tennessee at Knoxville.
“They don’t want to open up the floodgates for similar asylum claims based on these grounds,” she suggested.