WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court on March 2 backed parents’ right to be told if their child changes their name or pronouns they’re using in school, blocking California rules aimed at preventing teachers from outing transgender students to their parents.
“Under long-established precedent, parents − not the State − have primary authority with respect to ‘the upbringing and education of children,’” the majority said in an unsigned opinion. “The right protected by these precedents includes the right not to be shut out of participation in decisions regarding their children’s mental health.”
The court’s three liberal justices dissented from the decision to grant the parents’ emergency request.
Justice Elena Kagan criticized the conservative majority for making a rushed decision about a case “raising novel legal questions and arousing strong views” that is at an early stage of litigation.
“The Court is impatient: It already knows what it thinks, and insists on getting everything over quickly,” she wrote of the decision that came without the full rounds of briefing and oral arguments for cases.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett responded in a concurring opinion joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh. Rather than acting out of impatience, Barrett wrote, the majority wanted to prevent parents from being harmed during the lengthy litigation.
“Under California’s policy, parents will be excluded − perhaps for years − from participating in consequential decisions about their child’s mental health and wellbeing,” she wrote.
The state can still protect students from unfit parents, the majority wrote, by enforcing child-abuse laws and removing children from their homes when appropriate.
California banned school districts from requiring notification
The issue of how schools can best support transgender and gender-nonconforming students has ignited fierce debates across the country, including in lawsuits that the Supreme Court previously declined to review.
Four California parents and four teachers represented by a Catholic legal group say the state is requiring schools to hide children’s transgender status from their parents, a violation of the parents’ and teachers’ constitutional rights.
One set of parents said they were not told that their junior-high daughter was being treated as male at school for most of a year. The other parents said they were lied to by their daughter’s teachers about how she was being referred to at school.
Lower courts were divided
In December, U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez in San Diego said parents have a constitutional right to be informed if their child expresses “gender incongruence” at school and barred educators from intentionally keeping gender transition information from parents. Teachers also cannot “socially transition a child over their parents’ objection,” the judge said.
“When it comes to a student’s change in gender identity, California state policymakers apparently do not trust parents to do the right thing for their child,” Benitez wrote.
The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals paused that order while the litigation continues. The appeals court said the order was too sweeping and likely wrong in concluding that the parents’ rights were violated under the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process clause, which courts have interpreted as guaranteeing fundamental parental rights.
California does not “categorically forbid disclosure of information about students’ gender identities without student consent,” a panel of three circuit judges wrote.
Parents sought emergency help
The Thomas More Society, the legal group representing the challengers, sought emergency help from the Supreme Court. They argued the appeals court should have followed the logic of the high court’s 2025 ruling that backed a parent’s right to remove their child from the classroom when storybooks with LGBTQ+ themes were being read.
“California’s policies unquestionably interfere with parents’ ability to direct the religious upbringing of their children,” lawyers for the California parents wrote in a filing about the state’s policies for dealing with transgender students.
Lawyers for the state said it’s the district judge who didn’t follow Supreme Court precedent when he issued an overly broad order despite the court’s 2025 decision limiting courts’ ability to universally pause rules.
The judge’s order allows for no exceptions, even for extreme cases where the student could “suffer physical or mental abuse” if parents are told about their gender identity or expression, California Attorney General Rob Bonta wrote in a filing.
“Efforts to balance parental interests and the needs of transgender students,” Bonta said, “raise complex questions that policymakers across the country continue to weigh.”
If that’s California’s way of weighing the needs of both sides, the challengers responded, then “California ‘balances’ the parents’ interests like McDonald’s balances the cow’s.”
Frequently Asked Questions
What did the Supreme Court decide?
The Supreme Court backed parents’ right to be told if their child changes their name or pronouns they’re using in school, blocking California rules aimed at preventing teachers from outing transgender students to their parents.
Why did the Supreme Court intervene?
The majority opinion stated that parents – not the State – have primary authority with respect to the upbringing and education of children, and have a right to participate in decisions regarding their children’s mental health.
What was the dissenting opinion?
Justice Elena Kagan criticized the conservative majority for making a rushed decision about a case “raising novel legal questions and arousing strong views” that is at an early stage of litigation.
As this case continues through the courts, how might this ruling shape the landscape of parental involvement in students’ gender identity journeys?
