USSC gender/pronoun case: “primary protectors of children’s best interests: their parents”

Posted on 3/2/26 at 9:36 pm

Posted by Bham4Tide

In a Van down by the River

Member since Feb 2011

24544 posts

Posted on 3/2/26 at 9:36 pm

LINK

Common sense prevails. Big, big decision for parent’s rights.

quote:
The Supreme Court on Monday night granted a request from a group of California parents to reinstate a ruling by a federal district court that prohibits schools in that state from “misleading parents about their children’s gender presentation” and that requires schools to follow parents’ instructions regarding the names and pronouns that children use there. In a seven-page order, the majority explained that the parents were likely to prevail on their claim that California’s policies violate the parents’ right to freely exercise their religion and their right to “direct the upbringing and education of their children . . . “

The dispute dates back to 2023, when two teachers sued the school district, seeking an exemption from the district’s policies regarding gender and pronouns. They were later joined as plaintiffs by parents whose children socially transitioned at school (or who believed that their children socially transitioned at school).

The district court ruled for the challengers, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit put that order on hold while the state appealed. The challengers then came to the Supreme Court, asking the justices to intervene. In a mixed ruling on Monday night, the majority handed a victory to the parents but turned down the request from the teachers.

The majority explained that the parents were ultimately likely to prevail on the merits of their claim that the state’s policies interfere with their right to freely exercise their religion. The policies are subject to the most stringent constitutional test, known as strict scrutiny, the majority wrote, because “they substantially interfere with the ‘right of parents to guide the religious development of their children.’” And they cannot pass that test, the majority continued, despite the state’s contention that the “policies advance a compelling interest in student safety and privacy” because they “cut out the primary protectors of children’s best interests: their parents.” Moreover, the majority added, parents have long had “primary authority with respect to ‘the upbringing and education of children,” including “the right not to be shut out of participation in decisions regarding their children’s mental health.”

This post was edited on 3/2/26 at 9:38 pm