Libs are gonna lib, but parents always win. That’s the slogan of the last six years or so, in my opinion. Apparently, the U.S. Supreme Court agrees.
On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court released a per curiam decision on a California policy directing teachers not to inform parents, or in some cases mislead them, if their child decides to socially transition to another gender while at school. These kids would leave their homes dressed and acting as their correct gender, then show up to school and be called a different name and dress like the opposite gender. The state ordered teachers not to tell parents this was going on in schools. Unsurprisingly, parents sued.
I want to note two things about this case so we get them out of the way. First, this order concerns an injunction. The case is not fully decided, and this case is not binding on other states. So if Colorado adopted this same policy, this opinion would not stop them. This simply reinstates an injunction put in place by a lower court. But the order’s opinion does give us strong clues on how this or any similar case will go in the Supreme Court.
Second, I want to point out that this is a per curiam opinion. It is anonymous and does not belong to anyone or any group of justices. But there are special writings. That becomes important later.
Now for the fun part.
At the heart of this case is a battle of rights and harms. Who has the greater right to direct how the child presents? The parents or the state? Does the state/school have an interest in “protecting” the child from potentially abusive parents who might object to the child transitioning?
Part of the analysis of whether an injunction is warranted is whether the plaintiffs, here the parents, have a likelihood of success on the merits – in other words, are they likely to win in court. To this the court said yes, noting that the policy likely substantially interferes with the parental right to guide the religious upbringing of their children. The Court also said that the parents, not the state, have primary authority with respect to the upbringing and education of children. That’s music to my mama ears!! Primary authority does not rest with the educated-to-the-hilt teachers, administrators or lawmakers. It rests with us, the parents.
We already saw the Court say this in the Mahmoud v. Taylor (2025)case. Yet the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals disregarded that for some reason. But the Supreme Court pointed out that the violation of parental rights in this policy is worse than just the introduction of LGBTQ storybooks.
Part of the analysis the Court considered was whether the state had a compelling interest in concealing gender transitions from parents. According to this common argument, teachers must protect students from parents who may abuse the child if they come out as transgender, never mind that their definition of abuse may only be a failure to call that child by their new name or pronouns. Yet the Court said the state does not have a compelling interest because it cuts out the primary protectors of the child’s best interests: their parents.
I just want to pause, soak that in, and then give liberals a minute to stop sputtering. Alright, now we’ll continue.
If we are trying to be fair, we will find ourselves asking what to do about the crazy abusive parents. As the Court points out, this injunction does not prevent child protective services from stepping in and enforcing child abuse laws already in existence. Imagine that! Relying on existing legal structures!
In writing this article, I’m cutting a lot of legal jargon and analysis. I’ll save that for one day when I have time to write a law review article on parental rights. But I am giving you the highlights and this big message:
You, the parent, have the right to the upbringing and education of your children. You are the expert, not the teacher. You are the protector of your child, not the state. The person best tasked with knowing the best interest of your child is you.
The policies allowing schools to transition children without telling parents are almost over. They’re about to be deader than disco. Things aren’t there yet, but based on this opinion, we have every reason to believe they will be.
That ruling hasn’t happened yet. But what I mentioned earlier about parents above the state is settled legal fact. All those principles were stated by the Court as quotations of previously-held opinions. They are deeply rooted in our history and tradition as a nation. They are yours. Do not let anyone try to take them away from you.
Laura Clark is a wife, mother, and community activist. She currently serves as the interim president of Alabama Center for Law and Liberty, a conservative nonprofit law firm that fights for limited government, free markets, and strong families in the courts. Anything written by Laura for this publication does not constitute legal advice.
The views and opinions expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the policy or position of 1819 News. To comment, please send an email with your name and contact information to [email protected].
Don't miss out! Subscribe to our newsletter and get our top stories every weekday morning.
