In parents’ ongoing legal battle to prevent California schools from secretly transitioning students’ gender without parental knowledge or consent, parents just scored another major win, this time at the U.S. Supreme Court.
The High Court ruled that California’s policies keeping such matters secret from parents likely violate their rights under both the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment and the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
As a result, California schools must now:
Tell parents the truth about their children’s gender presentation at school and their social transitioning efforts;
Follow parents’ directions regarding use of their children’s names and pronouns; and
Include in state-created or approved instructional materials notice of these rights.
In December 2025, a U.S. District Court Judge in San Diego ruled that California’s school gender identity secrecy policies violate parents’ constitutional rights in several ways. The court issued a state-wide injunction preventing California from enforcing these unconstitutional policies and requiring schools to comply with the three provisions outlined in the introduction.
Predictably, state officials, led by Attorney General Rob Bonta, appealed the District Court’s ruling to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. At their request, the Ninth Circuit stayed (or paused) the lower court’s order blocking enforcement of school gender identity secrecy policies in early January. The secrecy policies have been back in effect since this stay order.
However, the parents and teachers immediately filed an emergency request with the U.S. Supreme Court to lift the Ninth Circuit’s stay such that the December District Court order outlawing the policies could be enforced.
On March 2, the U.S. Supreme Court granted the parents’ emergency request and dissolved the stay. Although this order did not conclusively decide the merits, the High Court ruled that the parents were “likely” to prevail.
As a result, the writing is on the wall for the Ninth Circuit, where the appeal remains pending. The Supreme Court has made its position known.
For those of us who have opposed these school gender identity secrecy policies from the beginning, the Supreme Court’s order is vindication. Now, we have the law on our side.
This isn’t just a campaign slogan anymore: even the U.S. Supreme Court is on board with this! The Court ruled that parents are the “primary protectors” of their children’s best interests—not bureaucrats or other state actors.
Schools already inform parents when their children suffer injuries at school or come down with a cold or a fever. We’ve even had thoughtful teachers reach out when our sons merely seemed to be having off days. It made no sense that far more serious gender identity and associated mental health issues would somehow be kept secret.
As we predicted, the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Mahmoud v. Taylor blocking mandatory teaching of LGTBQ+ storybooks put California’s school gender identity secrecy policies on shaky ground. The U.S. Supreme Court has now ruled that these policies trample religious freedoms to an even larger extent than the storybooks (duh).
As the Supreme Court has now ruled, parents do not have to forfeit their right to direct the upbringing of their children at the schoolhouse door. Schools cannot facilitate student gender transitions without parental knowledge or consent.
Although the case now returns to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, the Supreme Court’s order that the policies are “likely” unconstitutional will heavily favor parents in that forum. The order provides strong direction to the Ninth Circuit and all other lower courts considering similar policies nationwide.
At the individual school district level, Administrative Regulation 5145.3 contains the policy at issue. The California Department of Education promulgated the policy, and it has been widely adopted in most school districts in California, including Newport-Mesa Unified School District (NMUSD).
Now that the Ninth Circuit’s stay has been lifted, these policies violate the District Court’s statewide order. Additionally, schools now have an affirmative duty to inform parents of their rights. By leaving these unconstitutional policies on the books, school districts increase their potential legal liability. They must act quickly to remove these policies.
NMUSD’s school board can be reached here: nmusdboardofeducation@nmusd.us.
Additionally, school board members who supported the secrecy policies and opposed parent notification have some explaining to do.
At Newport-Mesa, the following Trustees opposed a parent notification policy proposed by former Trustee Michelle Barto on July 25, 2023:
Trustee Carol Crane
Trustee Michelle Murphy
Trustee Leah Ersoylu
Comments
Nothing yet. Say the first thing.
Sign in to join the conversation.