社区黑料

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for 社区黑料 Newsletter

Updated February 12

California Attorney General Rob Bonta Wednesday as part of an ongoing dispute over whether schools should proactively notify parents if their children change their gender identity.聽

The lawsuit comes in response to Education Secretary Linda McMahon’s聽a concluding that the state violated the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act and in her words, 鈥渆gregiously abused its authority by pressuring school officials to withhold information about students鈥� so-called 鈥榞ender transitions鈥� from their parents.”聽 Her letter cited a 2025 law that prohibits聽districts from forcing educators to 鈥渙ut鈥� students against their will.

The agency has threatened to revoke all of the state鈥檚 federal education funding, nearly $5 billion annually. But in the filing, Bonta said the department has “failed to demonstrate even a single violation of FERPA,” which gives parents the right to review education records. The potential loss of funding, he wrote, “presents an imminent and irreparable injury to California and infringes upon the state鈥檚 substantial interests.”

The Trump administration says California schools violated parents鈥� rights by pressuring schools to keep students鈥� gender transitions a secret.

In announced Wednesday, the U.S. Department of Education told state officials that they can resolve the dispute by treating any school 鈥済ender support plans鈥� as education records available for parents鈥� inspection and let districts enforce 鈥減ro-parental notification approaches.鈥�

鈥淯nder Gavin Newsom鈥檚 failed leadership, school personnel have even bragged about facilitating 鈥榞ender transitions,鈥� and shared strategies to target minors and conceal information about children from their own families,鈥� Education Secretary Linda McMahon said in a statement. The department referenced a public records request by a showing that six California districts changed the names or pronouns of 300 students in the 2023-24 school year. The announcement doesn鈥檛 spell out what penalties, if any, the state might face if it doesn鈥檛 comply.

But most student privacy experts say the department is misinterpreting the Federal Education Rights and Privacy Act. While FERPA gives parents the right to inspect their children鈥檚 education records, it doesn鈥檛 compel districts to notify a parent if their child changes their gender identity at school.

The department launched last March, based on a request from Julie Hamill, a conservative attorney who argued that state policies and guidance amounted to a 鈥渟cheme鈥� to conceal students鈥� gender identity from parents. Now an assistant U.S. attorney, Hamill cited a Q&A document, later rescinded, that to consult students before deciding whether to share information on their gender identity, including with their parents. Some districts, she wrote, would change students鈥� names and pronouns in school databases, but parents would see legal names when they logged in. 

Federal officials also took aim at a California law, passed in 2025, which says districts can鈥檛 force educators to 鈥渙ut鈥� students against their will. Liz Sanders, spokeswoman for the California Department of Education, said officials were reviewing the department’s findings and referred 社区黑料 to previous statements. In October, the the new law, known as the SAFETY Act, doesn鈥檛 prohibit school staff 鈥渇rom sharing any information with parents鈥� and doesn鈥檛 override FERPA. 

The department鈥檚 determination further escalates an ongoing, emotional debate between state leaders who say students have a right to privacy and an administration that holds such decisions are the responsibility of parents. Advocates for LGBTQ students and many educators say they鈥檙e trying to protect students who might face rejection or abuse at home. But others call such actions 鈥減arental exclusion鈥� policies that violate parents鈥� constitutional rights to direct the upbringing of their children. 

鈥淚f a student is contemplating life-altering changes, the least a school can do is notify their parent or guardian,鈥� McMahon .

Lydia McLaughlin, the parent whose experience Hamill cited in the letter to federal officials last January, called the news 鈥渂ittersweet.鈥� She seeking emails and schoolwork from the Hart Unified High School District, north of Los Angeles, that would demonstrate how school staff were socially transitioning her child from female to male. Administrators initially refused to meet with McLaughlin and cited a that protects trans students鈥� access to programs, sports and facilities that align with their gender identity. 

McLaughlin never filed a formal FERPA complaint with the Education Department鈥檚 Student Privacy Policy Office because she ultimately got the records she was seeking after threatening to sue the district. She told 社区黑料 last year that she believed a lot of the communication between staff members using the student鈥檚 preferred male name wasn鈥檛 in writing.

Now in college, her child identifies as a girl, 鈥渓oves feminine clothes again鈥� and has returned to ballet dancing after a five-year break.

鈥淚t’s been a long road to this moment,鈥� McLaughlin said. 鈥淚 only dreamed that there would be some sort of justice for what the school district did.鈥�

FERPA experts disagree with the department鈥檚 conclusion. Elana Zeide, a law professor at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, said officials didn鈥檛 point to a specific violation in which a parent was denied access to education records. And many districts still follow a legal precedent that doesn’t consider staff emails to be part of a student鈥檚 official record. 

鈥淵ou could not like these policies at all. You can be vehemently opposed to them,鈥� Zeide said. 鈥淏ut that doesn’t mean you can accuse the state of a violation when there aren鈥檛 the facts to support it .鈥�

But Lance Christensen, vice president of the conservative California Policy Center, called the department鈥檚 announcement. a 鈥渂ig deal.鈥�

鈥淲e’re thrilled that the federal government is finally taking federal law seriously and is interested in protecting the natural rights of parents,鈥� he said.

Jorge Reyes Salinas, a spokesman for Equality California, an LGBTQ advocacy group, called the decision 鈥減art of a broader, deliberate campaign to attack transgender young people and undermine their ability to learn and thrive in school.鈥�

Cases before the Supreme Court

The department鈥檚 demands come as the U.S. Supreme Court considers whether to hear three different cases, including one from California, focused on the same issues.

In a , U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez ruled in December in favor of two teachers from the Escondido Union School District, near San Diego, who said that requiring them to keep a student鈥檚 gender identity private violated their Christian faith. Parents later joined the lawsuit against the state. 

Benitez鈥檚 broad ruling said that California schools must prominently display wording that says parents 鈥渉ave a federal constitutional right to be informed if their public school student child expresses gender incongruence鈥� and that school staff also have a right to 鈥渁ccurately inform鈥� parents. 

Attorney General Rob Bonta appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which blocked the ruling. The teachers are now asking the Supreme Court to overrule the lower court, but the justices have not yet said whether they鈥檒l get involved. Florida, Montana and West Virginia filed a brief in support of the teachers and parents, saying the 鈥淐onstitution places the burden on states to respect fundamental rights, not on citizens to claw back the right to parent their own children.鈥�

But Bonta told the court that the consequences of compelling the disclosure of gender identity would be 鈥渋rreversible鈥� for many students. Benitez鈥檚 ruling, he said, would leave teachers and other school staff confused about what they can and can鈥檛 do.

The high court is also debating whether to hear two other cases in which parents allege that educators supported students鈥� gender identity changes at school without their knowledge. It takes only four justices to decide whether to hear a case. 

Jeff and January Littlejohn of Florida the Leon County district, alleging that Deeklake Middle School violated their rights by supporting their child鈥檚 gender transition from female to male behind their backs. 

Officials said educators were following guidance, which discourages 鈥渙uting鈥� LGBTQ students..

A federal district court dismissed the case. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit also ruled for the school system, saying that educators鈥� actions did not 鈥渟hock the conscience,鈥� in a legal sense.

鈥淒efendants did not act with intent to injure,鈥� the court said. 鈥淭o the contrary, they sought to help the child.鈥�

The First Circuit Court of Appeals issued a in Foote v. Ludlow School Committee. In that case, parents said staff at Baird Middle School in Ludlow, Massachusetts, concealed that their 11 year-old identified as genderqueer at school and was using a new preferred name. 

The three-judge panel wrote that while they sympathized with the parents鈥� desire for information about their children, the law doesn鈥檛 鈥渞equire governments to assist parents in exercising their fundamental right to direct the upbringing of their children.鈥�

Did you use this article in your work?

We鈥檇 love to hear how 社区黑料鈥檚 reporting is helping educators, researchers, and policymakers.