Bad "Parents Rights" groups lose court challenges against Transgender Student Policies!

The irresponsible "Parental Rights" movement, where bad parents try to foist off their inability to guide and communicate with their children to schools and teachers, continues. 

Seriously, if a parent doesn't even notice their own kid's behavior enough to just ask, why is this a school problem? 

Here's the latest from EdWeek, a subscription-based publication (my last free article of the month):

Over the last three years, parents in at least six states have sued school districts over policies the districts say support transgender, gender nonconforming, and nonbinary students … claim that their 14th Amendment rights to direct the upbringing of their children are violated when schools do not inform them of their children’s pronouns or names, or aid in their social transition at school in any other way.

None of the parents suing schools over this issue have won a legal argument against a school district yet. Two cases have been dismissed after judges ruled that the school districts did not violate any laws. In two other cases, parents have appealed the court’s decision and the final verdict is pending. The latest case was filed last month, and no further action has been taken so far. So far, no school district that was sued has walked back its policies.

Chris Erchull, an attorney for GLAD, a legal organization that defends LGBTQ+ rights: GLAD has filed amicus briefs in support of school districts’ transgender student policies, supporting lawsuit dismissals, in four of the six cases.

However, these cases are a part of a national effort to restrict the rights of transgender students. For example, Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative Christian legal advocacy group, has been involved in multiple pronoun lawsuits. “What we’re seeing right now is an effort to single out one aspect of student identity development for its special scrutiny and special surveillance and special reporting requirements,” Erchull said. “What we see as a theme that ties all this together, is that it’s about targeting transgender youth and preventing them from having access to the education that they need, to the health care they need, to everything else they need to be to thrive and to be successful as they as they grow into adults.”

Here’s a roundup of some pronoun-related cases in six states, and where they stand.

Judge dismisses lawsuit challenging transgender student policy in Wisconsin school district, appeal filed

In February 2020, a few parents anonymously sued the Madison Metropolitan School District in Wisconsin, alleging that the school district’s transgender and nonbinary student policy violates parental rights by allowing students to use names and pronouns at school different from those they were assigned at birth, without providing parental notification absent a student’s consent.

This appeared to be the first lawsuit of its kind, soon followed by others across the country.

The district’s policy states that “students will be called by their affirmed name and pronouns regardless of parent/guardian permission to change their name and gender in MMSD systems.” However, to change their affirmed name and pronouns in the district-wide student system, students need the permission of one parent or legal guardian, according to the policy.

The parents who sued asked to keep their names entirely confidential, which was not permitted based on a decision by the appeals court. The Wisconsin Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the court of appeals to require the parents to disclose their identities to opposing attorneys, while allowing them to keep their names sealed and confidential from the public and the district.

The parents also sought a temporary injunction to make the district stop enforcing its transgender policy, which was denied. Last November, a judge dismissed the case, ruling that the sole remaining plaintiff after the request for anonymity was rejected did not have standing because the child’s hypothetical chances of changing their name and pronouns without informing the plaintiff were too remote to justify any judicial intervention, according to the judge’s opinion. The plaintiff has filed an appeal of that dismissal.

Maryland school district triumphs as judge rejects lawsuit on gender identity guidelines

In 2022, three parents anonymously filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court objecting to the Montgomery County, Md., district’s guidelines for student gender identity, saying it violated their constitutional rights as parents.

Last August, U.S. District Judge Paul Grimm ruled in favor of the district and threw out the lawsuit. The Maryland decision marked the first ruling of its kind amid half a dozen similar lawsuits. In that case, the judge not only ruled in favor of the district, but also called its guidelines necessary and flexible.

However, a panel of conservative U.S. appeals court judges may revive the legal challenge, Reuters reported in March.

____________________________________________________________________________

The following story is shocking in what it might allow teachers to claim in the future, and eventually be broadened to include other topics. They're asking that their "free speech" rights be allowed to trample on other students' speech rights, which is what the courts are supposed to protect against. 

Court dismisses parents’ claims, but teachers’ lawsuit continues against Virginia school district

Six parents and teachers sued Harrisonburg City Public Schools last year over its gender identity policy, which requires teachers to ask students for their preferred names and pronouns and then use them. The teachers alleged that the district violated their state constitutional rights by “compelling speech with which teachers strongly disagree. They also claimed that the district violated their free speech rights by forcing them to withhold “medical information” from parents.

A judge dismissed the parents’ part of the lawsuit, but not the teachers’ claims, according to the Harrisonburg Citizen. Teachers and staff will not face disciplinary measures if they do not use a student’s preferred name or pronoun or for sharing (or withholding) that information with parents, the judge’s opinion noted.

________________________________________________________________________________

New Hampshire Supreme Court hears arguments in appeal of parents’ lawsuit over notification policy

In April 2023, Judge Amy Messer dismissed a lawsuit filed by a mother against Manchester city schools over its policy that prevents officials from informing parents about their child’s social transition without the student’s permission.

The superior court judge determined that the protocol did not infringe on parents’ rights, and the district had a right to enact these kinds of policies to protect all students from discrimination, Messer wrote in her ruling dismissing the suit.

“While the defendants concede that the plaintiff has a fundamental right to raise her child as she wishes, they assert that the plaintiff’s right to parent does not include the ability to direct how the school teaches her child,” Messer wrote. “The court rejects the plaintiff’s argument that the policy violates her fundamental right to parent.”

Maine school district faces parent lawsuit for providing chest binder to student

Earlier this year, a Maine mom sued the Great Salt Bay Community School for allegedly violating her parental rights after a school counselor gave her child a chest binder, which is a garment worn to flatten breasts.

School counselors and staff were also using the student’s chosen name and pronouns without informing the parent, according to the lawsuit.

The district received three bomb threats because of the parent’s complaints at a school board meeting, according to communication sent by school and district leaders. It has continued to defend its transgender student policy.

This is the latest in a series of cases about transgender rights policies, however, in this case, the parent’s lawyers in this case said they’re solely focused on parental rights, and not on whether schools should support transgender students.

 

Party of Political Punishers!

It's getting national attention now that gerrymandered Republicans are no longer held accountable by their voters, so they can use the Senate filibuster to obstruct anything:

Republicans didn't run on anything, but they did run AGAINST everything. And that's all they have left. Authoritarian much? 

Punishment or Comply: It's so bad that if you don't comply with Trump-Republican memes, lies, and party Neanderthals, expect to be penalized harshly and minimized as an American. 

Punishment #1: Attack Transgender Athletes. 

 States proposing similar penalties are having one big problem though...

Plus, there are rules in place...

The legislation would go against guidance from high school and collegiate sports associations. The NCAA has allowed transgender athletes who have undergone hormone treatment to be able to compete for a decade … "Transgender girls who medically transition at an early age do not go through a male puberty, and therefore their participation in athletics as girls does not raise the same equity concerns that arise when transgender women transition after puberty," the association wrote.

Women are Weak and Can't Compete? Without saying a woman's place is in the kitchen, one female Republican state legislator made that point very clear:

Rep. Janel Brandtjen, R-Menomonee Falls, said, “That’s the biology, the reality. And honestly, you’ll ruin women’s sports forever. Why would you compete if you knew you couldn’t win? 

Punishment #2: Schools that opted out of In-person classes: This is just weird. Besides ignoring local control, they are also ballsy enough to deny the obvious, while arrogantly demanding things be done the "right" way: 

Republicans rejected the notion they were punishing anyone, saying they were simply providing an incentive to return to in-person learning. “I get the spin. I get the politics. That's what we do here,” said Republican Rep. Mark Born, a committee co-chair. “(But) this is for the folks who are doing the right thing to educate our kids in the classroom.”

Punishment #3: High Voter turnout must be Suppressed: Even after 10 years of Republican written voter suppression laws, we still don't have it right, and people still don't have confidence in the election? 

Sen. Alberta Darling said far too many people have sincere concerns about our electoral system. These bills will help restore trust and make sure our elections are handled fairly for everyone." Sen. Duey Stroebel argued public confidence in election is "at a crisis point."

Besides limiting voting drop boxes to just one per community, requiring them to be attached to the municipal clerks office, absentee voting would be restricted for "election integrity" of course: 

Urban Milwaukee: Republicans like Scott Walker and Reince Priebus, each with robust histories of absentee voting, now oppose it in the name of “election integrity.” Their real concern seems to be that absentee ballots will increase Democratic Party votes at the expense of Republican.

…despite... 

And nationally, out of Georgia:

Jennifer Ruben: It was a blunder, a gratuitous act that revealed not only their animus toward democracy but their lack of simple human decency. The Georgia bill threw in a provision to ban anyone from giving water or snacks to people standing in line to vote. It was a political error born of Republicans’ own arrogance and inhumanity. And it may cost them greatly in the battle over voting rights. President Biden declared, “It’s sick. It’s sick. You don’t need anything else to know that this is nothing but punitive designed to keep people from voting. You can’t provide water for people about to vote? Give me a break.”

The water provision is mean-spirited and blatantly punitive, instantly recognizable as a Jim Crow tactic designed to make people miserable. In the effort to show the law has nothing to do with voting security, Exhibit A may be the water provision. 

Punishment #4: Unmasking/Bullying: Don't be fooled when Vos Republicans say they recommend CDC guidelines for wearing a mask, it's total BS judging by their own actions. Bullying Democrats into a room full of unmasked Republicans is sweet revenge:

"So just to be clear, you're going to enforce somebody to wear a jacket in their office, but not have somebody wear a mask in the chamber. Is that correct?" Larson said.

"That is correct, senator. Those are not in the rules. Wearing of a coat is," Kapenga said.

"Do you feel safe on the Senate floor?" WISN 12's Kent Wainscott asked Larson.

"No, no. And that is the only time since the guidance came out that I had been inside a place where there was folks without masks," Larson said. "I would much rather turn in our jackets for masks and things that actually make sense to keep each other safe."

Punishment #5: Whitesplaining Black History Month Honorees: Republicans refused to recognize the month if they didn't get their way. They showed them:

JSOnline: Rep. David Bowen, Sen. LaTonya Johnson, Rep. LaKeshia Myers and Taylor said white Republican legislative leaders again sought changes to a resolution proposed by the Black caucus before allowing the measure to be put on the Assembly's calendar. Myers said GOP leaders wanted to remove names from the list, including Stacy Abrams, and add names, including Sen. Julian Bradley, who is the first Black Republican in the Wisconsin Senate.

UPDATE: 3/16/2021: Then this happened: 

Punishment #6: Democrats are Marxists, Defeat their Agenda: But nothing Democrats want to do is good, so Republicans must block and destroy their attempts to destroy America. Rep. Glenn Grothman explained the twisted thinking of QAnon believers everywhere. WKOW:  

Transphobic Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty use Lawsuit to intimidate public schools, students, and weaponize "Parental Rights."

Scott Walker's once pure political style of governing is now standard operating procedure in the GOP legislature. And their go-to think tank, the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty (WILL), is now their legal arm designed to use the courts as a way to legislate "from the bench."

The Constitution, as WILL imagines it, demands Parental Rights as a cure for Gender Dysphoria: WILL is suing "the Madison Metropolitan School District over its guidance for staff on how to handle transgender or gender-questioning students." WILL wants schools to make teachers and administrators expose gender-questioning students to disconnected parents. They say it's a constitutional right of parents:

"Constitutional?" About that...

The parental rights the U.S. Supreme Court previously recognized are of this type: there’s no specific clause that specifies that parents are entitled to direct the upbringing of their children, but the Court has (correctly) recognized such a right as an inherent feature of liberty.

It's also not surprising conservative constitutional literalists magically knew that "liberty" inherently applied to parental rights. WILL glosses over any parental responsibility at home of course. 

“By the time Plaintiffs learn the truth, the District may have already enabled their child to transition socially to a different gender identity without their consent, and that transition may become self-reinforcing, reducing the chances that their child will resolve the dysphoria in favor of his or her biological sex, as the vast majority of children do.” 

It's true the vast majority do resolve their gender dysphoria, still...

According to prospective studies, the majority of children diagnosed with gender dysphoria cease to desire to be the other sex by puberty, with most growing up to identify as gay, lesbian, or bisexual, with or without therapeutic intervention. If the dysphoria persists into puberty, it is very likely permanent.

Yes, there's a definite dominionist religious element at the center of WILL's argument. Where could something like that go wrong? Conversion therapy?

“As a direct result of their religious beliefs, if these Plaintiffs’ children ever experience gender dysphoria, they would not immediately ‘affirm’ whatever beliefs their children might have about their gender, but would instead remind them that they were ‘fearfully and wonderfully made,’ see Psalm 139:14, and seek to help them identify and address the underlying causes of the dysphoria and learn to accept and embrace their God-given sex,” the complaint states. 

...and I love this "guarantee," as if anyone has that kind of policy control:

“At the same time, Plaintiffs will never stop loving their children, or love them any less, no matter what they believe about their gender.”

Getting public schools into the middle of gender identity politics is part of the Republican effort to feed into homophobia and bigotry. This has nothing to do with "parental rights."

Point #1; If you believe as strongly in parental rights as WILL is pretending, you'll love this idea. A Missouri Republican used parental rights to get 14 and 15-year-olds into the labor force without public schools permission. This really happened in March of 2011. It never passed:

State Sen. Jane Cunningham says her quest to change Missouri's child labor laws is driven by her belief that the current restrictions are "implying that government can make a better decision than a parent." Children age 14 and 15 must obtain signed permits from the school they attend. She also contends the state's current labor laws are "over the top'' and prevent parents from "teaching a work ethic to their children." "This act modifies the child labor laws. It eliminates the prohibition on employment of children under age 14. Restrictions on the number of hours and restrictions on when a child may work during the day are also removed. It also repeals the requirement that a child aged 14 or 15 obtain a work certificate or work permit in order to be employed. Children under 16 will also be allowed to work in any capacity in a motel, resort or hotel where sleeping accommodations are furnished. It also removes the authority of the director of the Division of Labor Standards to inspect employers who employ children and to require them to keep certain records for children they employ. 

Point #2: 14-Year-Old workers in Texas too, with a union twist: We should be thankful the Walker administration didn't insist on going this far:

If the bill passes, children as young as 14 will be able to enter into an employment agreement with most employers without parental consent, but they will not be permitted to join a union without a signed parental consent.

Point #3: Parental Rights GONE thanks to Wisconsin Republicans, and WILL did nothing at the time, and still hasn't since it passed. Constitutional rights...?: 

The GOP-controlled legislature has given final approval and sent to Republican Gov. Scott Walker a bill that would loosen child labor laws. Assembly Bill 25 removes the requirement for 16- and 17-year-olds to obtain permits signed by a parent or guardian in order to work. The measure was approved on a party line 20-12 vote. Democrats maintain the bill would allow children to make important life decisions that could adversely affect their educations — against their parents’ wishes.

In 2011, Walker signed into law a provision in the 2011-13 state budget which eliminated restrictions on 16- and 17-year-olds working more than 26 hours during a school week and more than 50 hours a week during vacations.

 If no parent or guardian is available, a DWD officer can sign off for a child worker. These officers are funded by a $10 permit fee paid by the employer. A portion of the fee also goes to the state’s General Treasury. By eliminating this fee, Republicans are cutting funding for the enforcement of child labor laws and at a time when every penny counts, needlessly reducing state revenue.

WILL Lawsuit is against Gender Questioning Students, and not really about Parents, it's Political Transphobia: Wouldn't you know it, a high school junior and sophomore sound more like the adults in the room identifying the real intent of the lawsuit:

The Madison Memorial High School Gender Equity Association began to rally in support of the guidance after WILL’s initial complaint in the fall, said junior Maggie Di Sanza and sophomore Amira Pierotti, two of its leaders. They said the guidance serves as an essential way to protect students’ rights and help them through a period of time that can be challenging, even with parental support.

“It’s just incomprehensible to me that anyone would target these rights and do it with not a care about the students, about kids,” Amira said in an interview last month. “This (lawsuit) isn’t for the betterment of others, this is because you are scared that you don’t know what’s going on with your kids and that you’re afraid they’re trans or gender-expansive because you are transphobic.”

Their advocacy has included circulating a petition to other district schools and creating signage for buildings to reassure students they have staff’s support. Amira cited statistics showing non-binary and gender fluid students are more likely to be kicked out by their parents, report anxiety and consider self-harm. “It’s just a really frightening time right now,” she said, adding that showing “visible support” for those students is important when opposition like this is made public.

WILL is setting up for Constitutional Amendment: Winning this case is an important precursor to a proposed constitutional amendment. Who knew this was out there:

Threatened by Lawsuit, Florida Christian group takes control of Mt. Horeb school.

You’ve heard it before; Republican Governors say they want to replace Common Core with a unique statewide educational policy. Local, local, local!!!

Except when they don’t. Are ready for another right wing lie?

What does a supposed Wisconsin "centered" curriculum really looks like under conservative authority rule:

WSJ: A 6-year-old student went to school at Mount Horeb Primary Center with a new public identity. It was her first day introducing herself to classmates as the girl her mother says “she really is.” In an effort to support the student’s transition from male to female, and to help her young classmates understand, the school had planned to read and discuss the book “I Am Jazz,” the true story of Jazz Jennings, a transgender girl who stars in a TLC reality show named after the book.

But the reading didn’t happen after the Liberty Counsel, a Florida-based religious conservative organization, threatened to sue the school district for teaching the book and overstepping parental rights.

Florida!!!? This is an early warning shot that can't be ignored. The threat of a simple lawsuit is powerful, and could bankrupt or severely limit local school districts. Think about it, outside groups from anywhere in the country can call the shots. And they can do this over any issue they don't support.

Same goes for Local Transgender Restroom policies: While districts were developing their own plans, with local input, the national right wing opposition to transgender restrooms prompted state Republicans to create a “separate but equal” policy, bestowing second class status to kids seeking support. Do we really want another battle against the supposed "gay agenda?"   

That’s why this is so dangerous. It nurtures fear and distrust in future adults, a core right wing value:

Parent Amy Lyle said that the Primary Center’s initial decision to read the book excited her and her husband because it showed that the schools were looking to shed some light on a subject that is becoming more open in our society. 

“We firmly believe that education and information creates informed and compassionate children who turn into compassionate and respectful adults. It’s our obligation to provide the information. Families can have their own discussions outside the school, but the information should be provided. I don’t know if there is a more important lesson to be taught in our schools (than inclusion).”