Ninth Circuit Stays Ruling That Would Have Required Schools to Inform Parents of Gender Identity Changes

Last updated: January 18, 2026

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.

TL;DR

The Ninth Circuit suspended a lower court ruling that would have let California teachers notify parents about students' gender identity changes.
Two Escondido teachers filed the original lawsuit in 2023, citing religious objections to policies preventing parental disclosure.
The appeals court found California's policies do not categorically forbid disclosure when student wellbeing requires it.
Plaintiffs plan to seek Supreme Court review, making this a potential landmark case for parental rights in education.

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. Tweet Now Follow Learning Success

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.

Author Quote "

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

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.

Author Quote "

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

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.