Schools left wondering how to proceed after Supreme Court ruling on transitioning students
This is read by an automated voice.Please report any issues or inconsistencies here.
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court broke new ground this month when it ruled the Constitution forbids school policies in California that prevent parents from being told about their child’s gender transition at school.But the reach of this new parental right remains unclear.Does it mean all parents have a right to be informed if their child is using a new name and pronouns at school?Or is the right limited to parents who inquire and object to being “shut out of participation in decisions involving their children’s mental health,” as the high court said in Mirabelli vs.Bonta.Both sides in this legal battle accuse the other of creating confusion and uncertainty.
And that dispute has not subsided.UC Davis law professor Aaron Tang says understanding the Supreme Court’s order calls for a close reading of the statewide injunction handed down by U.S.
District Judge Roger Benitez in San Diego.That order prohibits school employees from “misleading” or “lying” to parents.
It did not say school officials and teachers had a duty to contact parents whenever they saw that a student changed their appearance or used a new name, he said.By clearing this order to take effect, the Supreme Court’s decision “means that schools must tell parents the truth about their child’s gender presentation at school if the parents request that information,” Tang said.“But the initial burden is on the parents.
This is not a rule that schools have an affirmative obligation to inform any and all parents if their child is presenting as a different gender,” he said.California The Supreme Court lifts stay on lower court ruling, which means parents can demand to know about their child’s gender issues without the child’s consent.The high court’s 6-3 order also indicated the reach of the judge’s injunction was limited.
It “does not provide relief for all the parents of California...