A federal appeals court has temporarily paused enforcement of a San Diego federal judge\u2019s ruling that had cleared the way for school staff to tell parents about possible changes\u00a0to their child\u2019s gender presentation without the student\u2019s consent.<\/p>\n
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals granted a short-term administrative stay of the ruling but has not yet decided whether to grant a longer-term stay pending an appeal. It\u2019s expected to rule on that next week.<\/p>\n
The case, Mirabelli v. Olson, began in 2023 when two Escondido Union School District teachers sued over the district\u2019s policy, based on state guidance at the time, prohibiting employees from disclosing what it called a student\u2019s transgender or gender-nonconforming status absent the student\u2019s consent.<\/p>\n
The state has said that doing this risks outing\u00a0a student who may be transgender or gender-nonconforming\u00a0to their parents, creating\u00a0an unsafe school environment and violating\u00a0state privacy and non-discrimination laws.<\/p>\n
But Judge Roger Benitez ruled last week<\/a> in favor of the plaintiffs in the class-action lawsuit. He said parents have a constitutional right, as part of their rights to raise and care for their children, to know about their child\u2019s gender presentation, and that they deserve to know if their child is gender nonconforming.<\/p>\n Benitez also issued a permanent injunction barring California public school employees from misleading parents about their child\u2019s gender presentation at school \u2014 for instance, by using different pronouns for a student with their parents than the student uses at school. He also barred the state from in any way interfering with a teacher or staff member telling parents about their child\u2019s gender.<\/p>\n State lawyers who are defending the case immediately appealed and asked for a stay of the ruling in the meantime.<\/p>\n The state argued in its\u00a0emergency request<\/a> for a stay that Benitez\u2019s ruling would \u201ccreate chaos and confusion among students, parents, teachers and staff.\u201d<\/p>\n Benitez\u2019s ruling does not order school employees to proactively notify parents about their child\u2019s gender presentation at school. But his ruling does say that school employees cannot mislead parents about it, raising questions as to whether\u00a0his ruling could require teachers to tell parents if the parents asked them.<\/p>\n The ruling may be at odds with a state law that went into effect a year ago,\u00a0AB 1955<\/a>, prohibiting public schools from requiring staff to disclose anything about a student\u2019s sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression without the student\u2019s consent, unless otherwise required by law. AB 1955 does not, however, prohibit teachers from telling parents about their student\u2019s gender.<\/p>\n To the California Legislative LGBTQ Caucus, which supported that legislation, Benitez\u2019s ruling posed a clear conflict.<\/p>\n \u201cIt would have created fear, confusion, and conflicting legal obligations,\u201d the caucus said. \u201cCalifornia law is clear that schools cannot compel educators to forcibly out students.\u201d<\/p>\n Because of Benitez\u2019s order, state attorneys said \u201cthere is a serious risk that teachers and schools will begin disclosing sensitive information about students\u2019 gender identities and expression \u2014 information that students disclosed relying on existing statutory and regulatory protections.\u201d<\/p>\n