The opinion is by Judge Reinhardt. Reinhardt is no friend of the Republic, that's for sure. He finds the second amendment to be a collective right in Sliveira v. Lockyer.
Here are Silveira case links, including legal briefs, and FR thread at the time the case was handed down. The SCOTUS denied certiori, so Silveira is the law of the land out in the 9th Circuit.
But back to the matter of asking children probing personal questions of a sexual nature ...
Meyer v. Nebraska. 262 US 390 (1923)
Pierce v. Society of Sisters. 268 US 510 (1925)
Fields v. Palmdale School Dist., -- F.3d- (9th Cir. 2005) <- The stinker
See also http://www.confirmthem.com/?p=1861 <- Survey questions listed
Fields v. Palmdale Sch. Dist., 271 F. Supp. 2d 1217 (C.D. Cal. 2003) <- Case below Summary of 271 F. Supp. 2d 1217 follows ...
Parents sued school district, alleging violations of their federal and state constitutional rights to privacy, deprivation of their civil rights, and negligence. After obtaining written parental consent, the school mental health counselor distributed a sexually explicit survey to children. However, the parents were not aware of the subject matter, and claimed that, had they known the content of the survey, they would not have consented. held: For school district. Although parents have a constitutionally protected interest in education and rearing of their children, the court dismissed this case because the Fourteenth Amendment does not protect this specific circumstance.http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3994/is_200404/ai_n9352196
Yet another reason why I have never sent my boys to gubmint skool.
Note that this whole thing was started by the school's mental health counselor. Seems to me that various types of youth counselors in schools, churches and civic agencies are filled with perverts. If I offend any of these "Dedicated" professionals who are only doing it for the children, STFU!