The class-action suit, filed by California teachers and parents, sought to overturn policies that barred K-12 educators from informing parents when students used names or pronouns different from those assigned at birth.<\/p>\n
San Diego U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez, a George W. Bush<\/a> appointee, ruled in favor of two Escondido Union School District teachers, Elizabeth Mirabelli and Lori Ann West, who argued that their school district’s policies “flatly prohibit teachers from respecting parents\u2019 wishes.”<\/p>\n COLORADO PARENTS SAY SCHOOL SILENCED DAUGHTER AFTER TRANSGENDER ROOMING INCIDENT AS LEGAL FIGHT ESCALATES<\/a><\/p>\n A demonstrator holds a transgender pride flag during a President’s Day protest near the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., on Feb. 17, 2025. (Stefani Reynolds\/Bloomberg via Getty Images)<\/p>\n In the suit, filed in April 2023, the middle school teachers named several district officials and claimed that the district’s policies violated their constitutional and religious rights.<\/p>\n The California state officials named in the suit included State Superintendent Tony Thurmond, Attorney General Rob Bonta and the State Board of Education.<\/p>\n The judgment handed down by Benitez applies to all California public schools, not just the district the suit was filed in. The judge wrote in his order granting summary judgment that the California public school system placed a “communication barrier between parents and teachers.”<\/p>\n “Parents and guardians have a federal constitutional right to be informed if their public school student child expresses gender incongruence,” Benitez wrote. “Teachers and school staff have a federal constitutional right to accurately inform the parent or guardian of their student when the student expresses gender incongruence.”<\/p>\n OREGON EDUCATORS WIN 650K SETTLEMENT AFTER SCHOOL DISTRICT FIRED THEM OVER GENDER POLICY COMMENTS<\/a><\/p>\n A transgender rights supporter takes part in a rally outside the U.S. Supreme Court as the justices hear arguments in a case on transgender health rights on Dec. 4, 2024, in Washington, D.C. (Kevin Dietsch\/Getty Images)<\/p>\n The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Mahmoud v. Taylor this summer was referenced by Benitez in his ruling. The Supreme Court’s decision granted public school parents the right to opt out of materials and discussions that are at odds with their religious beliefs.<\/p>\n As reported by EdSource<\/a>, while Benitez’s ruling referenced guidance that the California Department of Education shared with school districts, he stated that this case is not focused on California Assembly Bill 1955, which prohibited forcing teachers from disclosing the gender identity of their students.\u00a0<\/p>\n In response to more than a dozen California school boards adopting parental notification policies that required school staff to inform parents if a student asked to be referred to by a name or gender different from that assigned at birth, California Gov. Gavin Newsom<\/a> signed the Support Academic Futures and Educators for Today\u2019s Youth \u2014 known as the SAFETY Act \u2014 in 2024.<\/p>\n CLICK HERE FOR MORE COVERAGE OF MEDIA AND CULTURE<\/a><\/p>\n California Gov. Gavin Newsom speaks during a rally with Harris County Democrats at the IBEW local 716 union hall on Saturday, Nov. 8, 2025, in Houston. (Karen Warren\/AP Photo)<\/p>\n The Chicago-based conservative Catholic law firm that took the case, the Thomas More Society, issued a statement about the ruling on Monday and hailed the decision as a “landmark class-action ruling.”<\/p>\n “Today\u2019s incredible victory finally, and permanently, ends California\u2019s dangerous and unconstitutional regime of gender secrecy policies in schools,” said Paul Jonna<\/a> of the Thomas More Society.<\/p>\n Following Benitez’s ruling, the California Legislative LGBTQ caucus issued a statement arguing that the judge’s decision “deliberately injects confusion into the public understanding” of the state’s SAFETY Act and “signals an alarming willingness to undermine long-standing constitutional rights to privacy and nondiscrimination protections across California law.”\u00a0<\/p>\n The ACLU of Southern California<\/a> criticized the ruling, writing, “This case is part of a nationwide, coordinated attack on trans people and all those who stand up for trans youth. California must remain steadfast in its commitment to supporting trans youth and we look forward to seeing state leaders stand up for trans and gender nonconforming students by promptly pursuing an appeal.”<\/p>\n![\"Person](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/transgender-flag-during-protest.jpg\")
<\/p>\n![\"Parent](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/conversion-therapy-case.jpg\")
<\/p>\n![\"Gavin](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/gavin-newsom-in-houston.jpg\")
<\/p>\n