Centre County family, others sue PIAA over parochial student eligibility

A civil rights lawsuit filed Tuesday by a Centre County family and others seeks to force Pennsylvania’s governing body for high school sports to change its policy that they say excludes parochial school students from public school sports.

Three families and the Centre County-based Religious Rights Foundation of PA alleged the Pennsylvania Interscholastic Athletic Association’s policy violates the First Amendment’s free exercise and the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clauses.

After securing a settlement last month with State College Area School District to allow eligible parochial school students to participate in certain extracurricular activities, the latest lawsuit aims for a broader, statewide policy change.

“The Constitution is clear; Pennsylvania families do not have to choose between a faith-based education or their child’s educational and athletic opportunities,” attorney Tom E. Breth said in a written statement. “The PIAA must make this right. Until then, we will continue to fight for these students and their families to ensure they have the same opportunities as every student in the Commonwealth, regardless of their educational choice and religious affiliation.”

A message left Wednesday with a PIAA administrator was not immediately returned.

The families, including two who live in school districts outside of Centre County, alleged the PIAA discriminates against parochial school students by prohibiting them from participating in public school sports if they aren’t available at their religious schools.

The nonprofit cited what they argue are a handful of PIAA exceptions for other groups such as students at charter, cyber or private schools, but not those at parochial schools. Students are typically only eligible at the school where they are enrolled.

Despite several conversations before the lawsuit was filed, Breth said the PIAA has rebuffed changes to its policies.

“The PIAA is a state actor and must abide by the Commonwealth’s laws and respect the constitutional rights of Pennsylvanians,” Breth said in the statement. “That means allowing parochial school students the opportunity to participate in sports offered at their home school district when the sports are not offered at the student’s parochial school.

“Educational experiences, be it in the classroom or on the field, are integral to the development of young students, and those opportunities cannot be denied to students based solely on their families’ faith-based educational choice.”

The State College school board unanimously approved the district’s agreement with the nonprofit in June. The district did not admit liability, though its insurer agreed to pay the nonprofit’s attorneys $150,000.

Under the agreement, students who attend parochial schools that sponsor interscholastic athletic sports are not eligible to participate in those same sports through the district. If those schools do not offer a particular sport, parochial school students are eligible to participate through SCASD.

The district may still impose its general student selection criteria. Eligibility disputes were to be resolved with the PIAA. The agreement contains a similar clause for students looking to participate in co-curriculars or clubs.

School district attorney Paul J. Cianci told the Centre Daily Times that SCASD believed it could not permit parochial school student participation, in part, because the PIAA disfavored it. But as that litigation unfolded, Cianci said the district determined that is “not always the case.”

“Because PIAA’s position on this subject is not clear, the Consent Order provides essentially that PIAA must first approve of parochial school student participation on School District sports teams before there is any obligation on the part of the School District to permit the participation,” Cianci wrote in an email.

The district’s December 2023 request to have the lawsuit dismissed was rejected by U.S. District Judge Matthew W. Brann, the same judge assigned to handle the latest lawsuit.

“Regardless of what reasons some parents may have for sending their children to a non-public school, a religious reason has the same value as a secular reason,” Brann wrote in his opinion. “If some exemptions are made, a school’s refusal to make a religious one enforces a value judgment preferring secular conduct over religious.”

This story was originally published July 30, 2025 at 2:43 PM.

Bret Pallotto

Centre Daily Times

814-231-4648

Bret Pallotto primarily reports on courts and crime for the Centre Daily Times. He was raised in Mifflin County and graduated from Lock Haven University.