Juneteenth celebrations? While UK is going headlong into revolution even CA is more sane now?
Ninth Circuit Grants Preliminary Injunction Blocking CA Law Hiding Kids' Gender Identity From Parents
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has granted a preliminary injunction blocking a California law that banned schools from disclosing to parents a child’s “gender identity.”
The injunction blocks
California’s AB 1955, a law that prohibits schools from disclosing information to parents about a child’s sexual orientation, “gender identity,” or gender expression, unless the child consents.
The city of Huntington Beach had sued California Gov. Gavin Newsom over the law.
The ruling says in part:
“As the Court explained, the substantive due process right of parents 'to direct the upbringing and education of their children’ ‘includes the
right not to be shut out of participation in decisions regarding their children’s mental health,’ which includes the right to information known to the school about whether “a child exhibits symptoms of gender dysphoria at school."
America First Legal Foundation represented the city.
The Ninth Circuit reconsidered its prior denials of preliminary injunctive relief in light of the
Supreme Court’s decision in Mirabelli v. Bonta, 607 U.S. 492 (2026), and found that the Plaintiff-Parents satisfied all requirements for emergency relief. The court held that the parents “very likely have standing because they are objects of the challenged exclusion policies,” regardless of “any individualized showing as to whether a particular parent’s child was likely to exhibit gender dysphoria.”
The court further declared that “parents—not the State—have primary authority with respect to the
upbringing and education of children” and “have the right not to be shut out of participation in decisions regarding their children’s mental health.”
The Ninth Circuit concluded that AB 1955 “forbids the mandatory policies that the Constitution requires” regarding disclosure of gender dysphoria information to parents and that “[t]he deprivation of constitutional rights constitutes irreparable harm.”
The ruling said that the injunction “promotes child safety by guaranteeing fit parents a role in some of the most consequential decisions in their children’s lives.”
“The Ninth Circuit’s decision is a powerful vindication of
parental rights,” said Nick Barry, Senior Counsel at AFL. “California cannot use state law to force schoolteachers and administrators into a conspiracy of silence against parents. California’s law, and similar school policies, use state coercion to intentionally interfere with the parent-child relationship and separate a child from their parent. That is wrong and unlawful. The Constitution is clear — parents have the right to know what is happening with their children and make decisions regarding their mental health, and no state law can override that fundamental protection.”
