I'm conflicted. On the one hand, it seems like a Randian dystopia, with the government stepping in to prevent you from telling somebody else how to do something

I'm conflicted. On the one hand, it seems like a Randian dystopia, with the government stepping in to prevent you from telling somebody else how to do something. Want to tutor your cousin? Fill out 80 pages of paperwork, register as a school, submit to time-consuming performance reviews and curriculum evaluations. On the other hand, the law is addressing a real problem, and as the article points out, these schools are charging top dollar, and making some very big promises. If nobody is calling them on it, or if somebody is, but they wield no authority, then we have a problem. I'm not a libertarian, and I have no problem addressing these things on a case-by-case basis. The problem I see is that the law seems to be very broad, and could be applied arbitrarily to private study sessions just as well as the diploma-mill-minus-the-diploma situation we're seeing here. I think the law needs to be more targeted towards the problematic aspects of these schools, like grandiose claims in their advertising. If the standard truth-in-advertising laws are too toothless to apply here, then inspections are in order. But they should only apply to schools that make the kinds of claims that triggered the crackdown in the first place.