If you’ve been watching the back-and-forth between courts over what information schools can share with you about your own child, you’re not alone in feeling confused and concerned. Your instinct that something fundamental is at stake here—your relationship with your child and your ability to support them—is exactly right. A new appeals court decision has reignited this debate, leaving many parents wondering what their rights actually are when it comes to their children’s lives at school.
Appeals Court Pauses Pro-Parent Ruling
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has temporarily suspended an injunction that would have allowed California public school teachers to notify parents when students express a different gender identity at school. The three-judge panel, led by Chief Judge Mary Murguia, stayed U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez’s December 2025 decision in Mirabelli v. Bonta while the state’s appeal proceeds.
The lower court ruling had determined that California’s policies—which generally discourage teachers from disclosing a student’s gender expression to parents without the student’s consent—violated parents’ constitutional rights. Judge Benitez found that parents have a fundamental interest in being informed about significant matters affecting their children’s wellbeing.
The appeals court disagreed with how the lower court interpreted California’s policies, noting that the state “does not categorically forbid disclosure” and allows such disclosures when necessary “to protect the student’s wellbeing.”
Courts clash over whether parents can know about their child's life at school. This Ninth Circuit ruling shows why parental rights remain one of education's defining battles.
Two Teachers Challenged District Policy
The lawsuit was filed in April 2023 by Elizabeth Mirabelli and Lori Ann West, two former Escondido Union School District teachers who objected on religious grounds to policies that prevented them from informing parents about students’ gender expression at school. The Thomas More Society represented the teachers, arguing the policy violated their First Amendment rights.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta’s office appealed the lower court ruling, arguing that the injunction could harm students by disclosing personal information without their consent. State attorneys contended that such disclosures could damage trust between students and teachers and potentially put some students at risk. Understanding how to navigate these complex school communication situations is essential for parents—knowing effective advocacy strategies can help families make informed decisions about their children’s education.
The State does not categorically forbid disclosure of information about students’ gender identities to parents without student consent – Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, Court Opinion
Laura Lurns · Learning Success expert
Constitutional Questions at Center of Debate
The Ninth Circuit panel raised several concerns about the lower court’s decision. They questioned the “sweeping nature” of an injunction affecting millions of California students and all public school employees statewide. The court also found that the district court “failed to clearly identify the set of policies” being challenged.
On the substantive due process claims, the appeals court expressed doubt that parents possess a constitutional right to automatic notification of gender nonconformity observations, citing the Supreme Court’s caution against expanding such rights. They also referenced recent First Circuit precedent finding that using a student’s chosen name and pronouns does not constitute medical treatment triggering due process protections. Parents seeking to understand their educational advocacy rights may find this legal landscape particularly challenging to navigate.
Key takeaways
- Ninth Circuit Stays Pro-Parent Ruling: Appeals court suspended injunction that would have allowed California teachers to inform parents about students' gender identity changes.
- Constitutional Rights Questioned: Court expressed doubt that automatic parental notification constitutes a fundamental due process right, citing Supreme Court caution on expanding such protections.
- Supreme Court May Decide: Plaintiffs plan to seek review from the full Ninth Circuit and potentially the Supreme Court as parental rights in schools face national attention.
Case Likely Headed to Supreme Court
The stay remains in effect while appeals proceed, meaning California’s existing policies limiting mandatory disclosure remain operative for now. The Thomas More Society has indicated plans to ask the full Ninth Circuit to evaluate the case and may file an emergency request with the Supreme Court.
This case arrives as the Supreme Court, with its 6-3 conservative majority, continues to address related issues. The court recently upheld a Tennessee law regarding medical care for minors and will soon hear challenges to state laws affecting transgender student participation in school sports. How the high court ultimately views parental notification policies could reshape school-family communication across the nation.
For parents, the practical reality is that policies remain in flux. Whatever your perspective on the underlying issues, staying informed about your rights and maintaining open communication with your children remains the most reliable path forward during this period of legal uncertainty.
We believe that the district court misapplied the law and that the decision will ultimately be reversed on appeal – California Attorney General’s Office, Spokesperson
Laura Lurns · Learning Success expert
Whether you agree with these policies or not, one thing is clear: parents deserve to be partners in their children’s lives, not outsiders peering in. The bureaucratic maze of court rulings and policy shifts shouldn’t determine whether you have a relationship with your own child. Your instincts as a parent—to know, to understand, to support—aren’t outdated or unwelcome. They’re exactly what every child needs. If you’re navigating school challenges and feel like the system isn’t designed with your family in mind, the Learning Success All Access Program offers a free trial that includes a personalized Action Plan—and you keep that plan even if you decide it’s not the right fit.
See what All Access gives your child
See MTSS for schools
Is your child struggling in school?
Get your free personalized learning roadmap
You describe what you see at home. We turn it into a plan you start this week.
- Answer 5 short questionnaires about what you already notice, 30–45 minutes at your own kitchen table
- Your child sits no test and gets no score: nothing to schedule, nothing for them to dread
- You do the answering, the AI does the writing, and a person reviews it before it reaches you
- Access all 40+ courses instantly: reading, math, focus, processing and more, with new ones added regularly
Why we use AI, plainly: it writes from a knowledge base our team maintains and audits. We work through it line by line and pull anything the evidence stops supporting. The roadmap you get on Tuesday reflects what we corrected on Monday, and a human still reads it before you do.
Your school district must evaluate your child free of charge if you ask in writing, whatever your income and whatever the outcome (US, 34 CFR 300.111 and 300.301(b)). That route takes time and answers a different question than you do. This one starts today, from what you already know.
Your answers stay yours. We do not sell your personal information, and we do not hand identifiable assessment data to outside AI companies to train their models.
A screener is a starting point, not a diagnosis. If your child might need formal accommodations (an IEP or 504 plan), or you suspect a vision, hearing or medical cause, pursue a professional evaluation too. That is the only route to those supports.
References
- Reason (Volokh Conspiracy) - Ninth Circuit Suspends Injunction Blocking California Policy
- Education Week - Schools Can't Bar Teachers From Telling Parents, Judge Rules
