The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday issued an emergency order in a California case that centers on whether public schools must notify parents when students express their gender differently—an issue the court examined through the lens of competing parental rights and student privacy, and through religious freedom claims from plaintiffs.
The court cleared the way for California schools to tell parents if their children identify as transgender without first obtaining the student’s approval, while also blocking for now a state law that would have allowed automatic parental notification requirements when students change their pronouns or gender expression at school. The dispute has moved through lower-court proceedings, but the high court stepped in on an emergency appeal.
According to the Supreme Court order, the majority sided with religious plaintiffs represented by the Thomas More Society, which includes Catholic parents who challenged California school policies they said were aimed at preventing schools from “outing” transgender students to their families. The plaintiffs argued the policies violated their religious beliefs and burdened their free exercise.
The majority said the parents who brought the free-exercise claim had “sincere religious beliefs about sex and gender,” and that they felt a religious obligation to raise their children according to those beliefs. The order added that California’s policies violated those beliefs and burdened their free exercise.
In dissent, Justice Elena Kagan said the case was still working its way through lower courts and that the Supreme Court did not need to intervene at that moment. Kagan wrote that “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,” arguing that the court’s emergency action effectively “throws over” California’s policy.
California’s position emphasized privacy for students, particularly when students fear family rejection. The state argued that school policies and the state law attempt to balance parents’ rights with students’ privacy, including in situations involving gender expression at school.
The Supreme Court’s action also came with intra-court disagreement about how far the plaintiffs’ challenges should go. Conservative Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas, the report said, noted they would have granted teachers’ appeal to lift restrictions for them—an approach the majority did not take in the emergency order.
Outside the court, the Thomas More Society characterized the decision as a significant parental-rights ruling, while Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office defended the underlying approach, saying teachers should focus on instruction rather than being required to police students’ gender presentation. Marissa Saldivar, a spokesperson for the Democratic governor, said the order “undermines student privacy and the ability to learn in a safe and supportive classroom, free from discrimination based on gender identity.”
The Supreme Court’s intervention adds to a series of recent rulings affecting LGBTQ-related policy questions in education. The report said the court has ruled for religious plaintiffs in other cases, including allowing parents to withdraw children from public-school lessons if they object to storybooks with LGBTQ+ characters. The California order also came months after the court upheld state bans on gender-identity-related healthcare for minors, and the justices have been weighing whether to hear arguments in cases from other states involving allegations that schools facilitated social transition without informing parents.
Court-watchers also noted that the disputes over school policies for transgender students have appeared alongside litigation over other aspects of LGBTQ-related public life. The report said the Trump administration sued after determining that states’ transgender athlete policies violate federal civil rights law, and the Supreme Court rebuffed a similar case out of Wisconsin in December while some conservative justices indicated they would have taken it.
The emergency order means California schools and districts will face continuing uncertainty while the case proceeds, with the high court signaling that, at least for now, religious parents challenging the policies have gained a temporary path to blocking parts of the state’s approach.