How does this impact New Jersey?
News headlines broke Monday afternoon with a major win for parental rights from the U.S. Supreme Court. The Court ruled that California’s school policy that keeps parents in the dark about their child’s gender identity at school likely violates families’ First Amendment protections.
As the majority of Justices noted, the state cannot claim to protect student safety while “cutting out the primary protectors of children’s best interests: their parents.” (Sadly, this joint statement directly contradicts the opinions of the majority of legislators in Trenton who generally view parents with suspicion.)
However, this decision is technically not the final word. It sends the case Mirabelli vs Bonta back to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Still, we should be greatly encouraged! The ruling is a strong affirmation from the Supreme Court’s conservative majority that parents cannot be sidelined and do not surrender their children to the State when they walk into a public school.
New Jersey’s Attorney General Jennifer Davenport’s spokesperson, Sharon Lauchaire, publicly acknowledged on Tuesday that the court cases the State of New Jersey filed against Hanover, Middletown, Marlboro, and Manalapan are now under review in light of the Court’s decision.
What does this mean for New Jersey?
First, Governor Sherrill and Attorney General Davenport must decide whether they want to continue spending state tax dollars fighting local school districts, and forcing those districts to spend their own local tax dollars defending themselves, even though everyone understands that in the long run New Jersey will lose this fight.
Second, it means common sense is ultimately on the side of parents, and it will prevail in the end – even if the impact won’t be immediate.
What does this mean for all 50 states?
SCOTUS ruled only on an emergency‑docket request, requiring California to follow the lower federal court’s order while the full case proceeds. That lower court held that parents must be informed of their child’s gender identity at school. The full litigation could take years, and in the meantime, real children, real parents, and real families continue to be affected by California’s policy.
While the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals continues to litigate Mirabelli v. Bonta, a parallel battle is unfolding right here in our backyard. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals will soon hear New Jersey’s own case, Christian Heaps v. Delaware Valley Regional High School Board of Education. This case raises the very same concern: whether schools must inform parents about their child’s social gender transitioning at school. The outcome will directly address whether New Jersey districts may keep parents in the dark about critical decisions affecting their child’s identity and mental health.
Our greatest hope is that neither the California case nor the New Jersey case will ultimately be necessary, because Foote v. Ludlow School Committee is currently pending before the U.S. Supreme Court. The Court has not yet agreed to hear the case, but it has been repeatedly relisted on the docket. This means the Justices are still actively considering whether to take it. Pray that they do.
If parental rights win in that case, every state must comply with the ruling.
