Education has never been equal and never will be. Children are different (even those from the same socio-economic background), parents are different, teachers are different in their attitude, skill and commitment. Parents will always measure schools and make judgements about how good they are. That doesn't meant they always make good or well-informed judgements, but they make them anyway. Too many of the anti-accountability contributions to this debate wilfully ignore this. Is the criticism that people are making the judgements at all, or that they shouldn't have access to the kinds of data that Julie is suggesting?
The logical conclusion of those who are criticising Julie is that we shouldn't judge schools or make assessments of teacher performance. If that's not the conclusion, then how do these critics propose we legitimately hold schools and teachers accountable for what they do?
In a free society, parents must have the right to determine how best to educate their children and, within all the usual constraints (law, resources etc) do what they consider best. The fact that not everybody can choose the same education - or would want to - is not a bad thing. If there is a legtimate case for some measure of equalisation, then do something explicit, policy-driven and carefully measured about it. Don't assume that variations on the prohibition and random equalisation theme will secure the desired result.