SCOTUS sides with parents over California policies allowing secret 'gender transitions'

The U.S. Supreme Court granted an emergency application to several California parents March 2 and reinstated an injunction against state policies that allow schools to "transition" students without parental knowledge.

According to SCOTUSblog, the parents and two teachers sued their school district over its policies regarding gender and pronouns, including policies that allow schools to socially "transition" students behind their parents' backs. A district court ruled in favor of the parents and teachers, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit stayed that ruling while California appealed. The Supreme Court's 6-3 decision restores the injunction. The justices ruled that the parents are likely to succeed on their claims that the policies violate their religious freedom rights as well as their right to "direct the upbringing and education of their children."

In the ruling, the justices wrote that the parents demonstrated that the "policy 'substantially interfere[s]' with their First Amendment right 'to guide the religious development of their children.'" They also scrutinized California's claim that the "policies advance a compelling interest in student safety and privacy," saying that the policies will likely not survive strict scrutiny since they "cut out the primary protectors of children's best interests: their parents."

According to SCOTUSblog, the court's ruling reinstates the injunction for the parents but declines to do so for the teachers. Thomas More Society (TMS), the legal nonprofit representing the parents and teachers, stated in a press release that the ruling also rejects the appeals court's move to dismantle the class certification granted by the district court, which ensures that the injunction applies to parents across California as a class rather than just the individual parents named in the suit. According to TMS, the decision is "effectively shielding teachers as well, since the class-wide parental victory prohibits the very policies that teachers were being compelled to enforce."

Paul Jonna, special counsel at TMS, stated in the release that the decision constitutes a "watershed moment for parental rights in America."

"The Supreme Court has told California and every state in the nation in no uncertain terms: you cannot secretly transition a child behind a parent's back," he stated. "The Court's landmark reaffirmation of substantive due process, its vindication of religious liberty, and its approval of class-wide relief together set a historic precedent that will dismantle secret gender transition policies across the country."