Quote from NurseCubanitaRN2b
if the schools were not accredited then that would be a different story. For example the state of CA has no right to dictate how a school in Arkansas should model their nursing program
. The state of CA only has the right to approve schools that operate in CA. If CA were to regulate schools in other states then they should be allowed to regulate schools outside the country. Which in both cases is rediculous
In the case of nursing, the situation is already clear and has been for a long time -- of course CA can't tell a school in AR how it should operate; but CA (or any other state) clearly does
have the right to decide whether or not it considers the school to be meeting the standards set for schools within CA sufficiently for graduates of that school to be eligible for licensure in CA.
In the larger, general, sense, of course CA has no right to dictate how a school in another state should operate -- but we're talking about schools that are, in effect
, operating within the state of (to use your example) CA, by coming into the state electronically and providing education services to
residents of the state within
Take the issue of sales tax for online purchases, which has been controversial for quite some time. States take the position that a resident of the state who buys something online from a business operating in another state is making the purchase in the purchaser's state
, the same as if s/he buys something at the local mall, and should pay (home) state sales tax on that purchase. Or insurance -- insurance companies located in a particular state sell health, homeowner's, automobile insurance policies to people in states all over the US, but the policies offered by any of these companies in a particular state have to meet whatever specific minimum requirements and standards have been established by that state's legislature and insurance commissioner (or whatever the regulatory structure is in a particular state) -- because, even though the insurance company is located in one particular state, the business it conducts within other states is regulated by the other states
This is basically the same idea -- regardless of where the "school" is actually located, the education provided is taking place within the student's state
and the argument, therefore, is that the state has the right to require that the established state school standards be met. Obviously I'm an outlier on this issue on this forum, but it makes sense to me.