Contra Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment, the first argument heading is entitled "Material Issues of Fact Exist as to Plaintiff's § 1983 Claim of Infringement of His Fundamental Right in the Rearing of His Child as Protected by the Equal Protection Clause and the First Amendment Free Exercise Clause." J.A. at 135. 3 . The dissent argues that a "public employer can insist that employees waive certain rights,” dissent at 975, and summarizes the ultimate holding of this court in Montgomery to support its assertion, id. (noting that “this court upheld a school district's anti-nepotism policy, which required the transfer of one employee because that employee was married to another employee, despite the right to marry”). While our ultimate holding in Mo d 1479 (11th Cir.1984) (<HOLDING>). 5 . "We may affirm a decision of the district
recognizing the districts duty of care for the protection of school children in its schools recognizing fundamental right of parents to care for their children holding that a school board policy prohibiting employees from sending their children to private schools interfered with employees constitutional right to control the education of their children recognizing the right of the parent to give his children education suitable to their station in life holding that liberty includes the right of parents to establish a home and bring up children and to control the education of their own