Chino Valley Unified Sues California over Erosion of Parental Rights

Chino Valley Unified School District has filed a lawsuit against the state of California for the enactment of Assembly Bill 1955. This is the controversial new law recently signed by Governor Gavin Newsom that bars teachers and other school staff from disclosing if a student changes their gender identity to the child’s parents unless the child gives consent.

The summary of the AB 1955 states, “This bill would prohibit school districts, county offices of education, charter schools, and the state special schools, and a member of the governing board or body of those educational entities, from enacting or enforcing any policy, rule, or administrative regulation that requires an employee or a contractor to disclose any information related to a pupil’s sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression to any other person without the pupil’s consent unless otherwise required by law, as provided.”

The statute goes even further to tie the hands of school districts and other educational hierarchy from taking punitive action against teachers or staff who keep that information from parents. “The bill would prohibit employees or contractors of school districts, county offices of education, charter schools, or the state special schools, or members of the governing boards or bodies of those educational entities, from retaliating or taking adverse action against an employee on the basis that the employee supported a pupil in the exercise of specified rights, work activities, or providing certain instruction, as provided,” the law’s summary also states.

Liberty Justice Center filed the suit on behalf of the school district and a group of parents. The suit claims that the new law, set to go into effect in January of next year, violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution as well as the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA).

With activist teachers freely allowed to inject gender ideology into their academic curriculum and with the social contagion of transgenderism running rampant amongst minors in this country, AB 1955, in essence, allows children to make the decision to socially transition and change their gender identity without their parents knowing about it. Emily Rae, lead legal counsel from Liberty Justice Center echoed those sentiments in her public statement. “PK-12 minor students, most of whom are too young to drive, vote, or provide medical consent for themselves, are also too young to make life-altering decisions about their expressed gender identity without their parents’ knowledge. But that is precisely what AB 1955 enables—with potentially devastating consequences for children too young to fully comprehend them,” Rae said.

Spokeswoman for Governor Newsom, Izzy Gardon, called the lawsuit “deeply unserious” and expressed confidence a judge would quickly dismiss the lawsuit. “California law ensures minors can’t legally change their name or gender without parental consent, and parents continue to have guaranteed and full access to their student’s educational records consistent with federal law. We’re confident the state will swiftly prevail in this case,” she said.

Gardon may have confidence the state will prevail in the lawsuit, but the verbiage of the Constitution and FERPA may suggest otherwise. While the constitutional positions against the law will require some good legal arguments from both sides because of decades and centuries of Supreme Court precedents, FERPA seems to be more of an airtight angle to strike down the statute. FERPA very simply and resolutely lays out the rights of parents when it comes to their minor children. “An educational agency or institution shall give full rights under the Act to either parent, unless the agency or institution has been provided with evidence that there is a court order, State statute, or legally binding document relating to such matters as divorce, separation, or custody that specifically revokes these rights,” the act states.

There really seems to be no gray area in interpreting the words of the act; “full rights” is as all-encompassing as it gets. Gardon suggests that parents will be notified in the event of a legal name change or legal gender change. In the legal language of FERPA, these would be classified as “Personal Identifiable Information”, and FERPA goes to great lengths to define that term. If that were the only information that parents have the right to, then FERPA would use that terminology instead of giving parents “full rights.”

Overall, AB 1955 is a huge violation and erosion of parental rights in the state of California. The law indirectly implies that parents are not capable of doing what is right for their children, but rather government-run public schools staffed with political activists will determine how their children are raised. Furthermore, those activists moonlighting as educators enjoy immunity from retaliation when they actively hide information from parents. The law also puts huge life-changing decision making power in the hands of minors. There is a laundry list of things that minors are not legally allowed to do for very good reason; making gender identity changes should be no different.

Chino Valley Unified is bringing the fight to the state of California based on the voices of parents. Surely there are other parents in other school districts who want this law struck down. Hopefully other districts will hear those voices and join in a united fight for parental rights.