Posted on 01/05/2026 3:50:03 AM PST by karpov
Do parents have a right not to be lied to by a government school if their child starts undertaking a gender transition? That’s now a live legal dispute, and over the holidays a federal judge took the side of parents in a case from California. His ruling was stayed for now by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, but one of these cases could make it to the Supreme Court.
The California policies “are designed to create a zone of secrecy around a school student who expresses gender incongruity,” as Judge Roger Benitez writes. Children as young as two years old are supposed to consent before teachers talk to their parents about gender issues. Judge Benitez says this breaks the constitution on both sides: “Parents have a right to receive gender information and teachers have a right to provide to parents accurate information about a child’s gender identity.”
According to the 52-page ruling, the state defended its approach as needed to prevent bullying, and the judge lauds that goal. “The problem is that the parent exclusion policies seem to presume that it is the parents that will be the harassers from whom students need to be protected,” he writes. “California state policymakers apparently do not trust parents to do the right thing for their child.”
The ruling quotes a court declaration by an anonymous father, describing a series of school meetings about his daughter. “My wife asked each teacher simply if there was anything about her that the teacher felt was important for us to know,” he recounted. “Although at least two of the teachers seemed distinctly uncomfortable—one by acting defensive and rude, and the other by appearing nervous—every teacher answered, ‘No.’”
(Excerpt) Read more at wsj.com ...
It takes a government indoctrination center (village) to raise a child. Courts deciding? LOL!
Given what can EASILY be found on the Internet regarding public schools, it’s simply hard for me to feel sorry for parents that continue to subject their kids to that living hell, particularly when they have plenty of money to do otherwise, such as the case for the people I work with.
So the Ninth Circuit Court was involved. Where have I heard about them before?
It's about indoctrination into mental filth, and the end of educating our kids! ... SICKNESS!!
The headline was ambiguous to me. From the excerpt, the Judge said “No” to secret school gender transitions.
I think it is an admission that secret school gender transitions had occurred. The state of California, and their schools, wanted to continue the practice. It’s hard to imagine such evil in America.
If that includes mass executions of public school teachers, so be it.
Also see my tagline.
No.
"Right" is the WRONG word here.
Does this mean YES to open ones?
I don’t know. It makes sense to say that it means “Yes” to open gender transitions.
“Yeah - we are STILL gonna mutilate them and tell ya right to your face!”
Laws always “make it so”. Right?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.