needing to worry about the same boundary limitations that public schools have - but that's the case whether or not they are bringing in international students or local Utah students.

The issue I have with this complaint, though, is when they state "these international players are taking away opportunities for our local Utah kids when it comes to playing high school basketball". That seems like a gross exaggeration as we are talking about a very narrow pool of schools (private schools) that are even engaging in this and the impact to "taking away opportunities" is incredibly limited when looking at the statewide level. Additionally, you can also argue that they are giving opportunities to players from overseas (in Africa especially) to be able to come to the US, get a quality education, perhaps get an athletic scholarship to play in college, and the positive impact it can have on these international students' lives is a very good thing, IMO. So when it comes to this argument, it sounds very xenophobic to me and is in line with the whole "the foreigners are coming in and stealing jobs away from hard working American citizens" arguments.

Now, if you want to talk about concerns with competitive balance and private/charter schools with open borders who are able to draw in players from all over the state (and internationally) compared to public schools who for the most part can only draw from the pool of players who live in their boundaries - I think this is a much more valid concern. But simply saying these international student's can't play may not be the best solution. Perhaps you create a "private school"/open division where schools like Layton Christian, Judge Memorial, etc. can compete may be the solution, and then keep the other 1A/2A/3A/4A/5A/6A divisions only available for public schools.