In one of several cases to hit the Supreme Court this term involving trans people, the court has opted to weigh in where they did not necessarily need to in the case of California's law shielding trans, nonbinary and questioning kids from being outed to their parents against their will.
The high court's conservative majority has once again struck a blow to the rights of queer and trans kids, granting an emergency appeal filed by a conservative legal group and reinstating a lower court's ruling that blocked California's law aimed at protecting the privacy of kids from unsupportive families seeking to socially transition at school.
As the Associated Press reports, the 6-3 decision came with a dissent written by Justice Elena Kagan accusing the court of trying to "throw over" the will of a sovereign state.
The unsigned decision, by the court's six-justice majority, said that "The state argues that its policies advance a compelling interest in student safety and privacy. But those policies cut out the primary protectors of children’s best interests: their parents." And, they add that the 14th Amendment's guarantee of due process "includes the right not to be shut out of participation in decisions regarding their children’s mental health."
The case was brought by two sets of Catholic parents who were represented by the conservative Thomas More Society. The plaintiffs argued that the law caused schools to "mislead them and secretly facilitate the children’s social transition despite their objections," per the AP.
Justice Kagan wrote in her dissent, joined by Justices Jackson and Sotomayor, that the court did not need to intervene while this case made its way through the state courts. A California appeals court had earlier stayed the decision of the lower court while it considered the case.
"If nothing else, this Court owes it to a sovereign State to avoid throwing over its policies in a slapdash way, if the Court can provide normal procedures," Kagan wrote. "And throwing over a State’s policy is what the Court does today."
This emergency ruling follows a similar case out of Wisconsin that the court decided not to take up in December 2024, and it follows oral arguments in a case regarding trans student athletes in January that will likely go the conservative way as well.
In November, the court issued another emergency ruling allowing the Trump administration to cease issuing passports to trans people with the gender marker of their choice — a practice that dates back about 40 years. And in the court's last term, the conservative majority upheld a state law in Tennessee that bans gender-affirming healthcare for minors — a decision that has had broad impacts across the country for trans kids who were already receiving such care.
Photo by Ian Hutchinson
