Mississippi’s K-12 students should be able to more easily transfer to public schools other than the ones they are residentially assigned to. Some of Mississippi’s neighbors, including Arkansas and Tennessee, have already significantly improved their open enrollment laws, which considerably expand public education options by allowing kids to transfer to public schools with available seats.
Open enrollment policies are popular with parents and students. They help many children escape bullying, access college-level classes, streamline family commutes, and attend schools that are better fits than their assigned schools. September 2025 polling by EdChoice-Morning Consult found that 76% of parents with school-aged children supported open enrollment policies.
Since 2020, 17 states have improved their open enrollment laws. This year, Mississippi lawmakers have taken note. Dueling proposals in the state Senate and the House aim to make it easier for public school students to transfer to schools that are a better fit. This is an important step in the right direction for students.
Mississippi House Bill (HB) 2 eliminates a provision in state law that requires public school transfer students to get permission from both the sending and receiving school districts. If codified, students would be admitted to the new school as long as the receiving district is willing to accept them. Moreover, school districts would be prohibited from discriminating against transfer applicants on the basis of their abilities or disabilities.
HB 2 would also make open enrollment more transparent at the state and local levels. It would require districts to post their available capacity by grade level and all open enrollment policies and procedures on their websites. These family-friendly provisions ensure that parents and students know when, where, and how to apply for transfers.
The Mississippi Department of Education would also publish an annual report with district-level data, including the number of public school transfers and the number of denied applications.
Wisconsin has regularly published similar reports to provide that state’s policymakers, taxpayers, and families with detailed district-level information on how open enrollment policies affect their districts.
House Bill 2, however, could still be improved. Ideally, it would require all school districts to participate in cross- and within-district open enrollment, allowing students to transfer to any public school as long as space is available. At the very least, Mississippi lawmakers should establish a within-district open enrollment policy in state law. Right now, Mississippi is one of just seven states without a law allowing kids to transfer to other public schools in their assigned district.
Additionally, school districts should be required to provide rejected applicants with a written explanation for their transfer denial. Rejected applicants should also be able to appeal their transfer denial to a neutral entity, such as the Mississippi Department of Education, whose decision would be final.
Lastly, HB 2 should be amended to clarify that Mississippi public school students may not be charged tuition under any circumstances. While current law prohibits public school districts from assessing tuition fees on transfer students, many districts do charge tuition to students who live outside their boundaries, including the Gulfport School District, Lincoln County School District, and Pascagoula-Gautier School District. Tuition fees like these can be an insurmountable burden for some transfer applicants, especially low-income families.
Because school districts have significant discretion in setting their own capacity limits, increased district enrollments from transfer students wouldn’t exceed the “tipping point” where transfers would cause districts to take on new costs like hiring more staff.
House Bill 2’s counterpart, Senate Bill (SB) 2002, also eliminates the existing provision requiring transfer applicants to obtain permission from both the sending and receiving districts. Only three other states, California, Washington, and Georgia, impose such burdensome requirements on transfer applicants today.
Unfortunately, unlike HB 2, Senate Bill 2002 doesn’t include provisions to improve state- or district-level transparency or to prevent discrimination against transfer students on the basis of their abilities or disabilities.
It is also troubling that SB 2002 would eliminate existing statutes that prohibit districts from assessing fees on transfer students and add provisions allowing districts to charge such fees to transfers. These tuition rates or fees would be set wholly at the district’s discretion.
Both House Bill 2 and Senate Bill 2002 take some steps in the right direction by eliminating the onerous requirement that transfer applicants receive permission from both the sending and receiving districts to initiate a transfer.
HB 2 also significantly improves transparency at the state and local levels and ensures that public schools are open to all students regardless of their ability or disability.
Currently, Mississippi ties for third-to-last in the nation with New York on Reason Foundation’s annual open enrollment rankings and scoresheet. However, with the improvements in HB 2, Mississippi would moderately improve its score. These improvements would be a step forward for students and could lay the groundwork for broader reforms in the future.