The Supreme Court might address a hidden gender transition policy affecting over 1,000 school districts. Despite a directive from President Donald Trump aimed at halting funding for schools that keep parents uninformed about these transitions, many districts still implement such policies. Parents are calling on the Court to clarify the legal standing regarding parental rights on this issue.
Sarah Partial Perry, vice president of education and law, shared with a news outlet that the problem of secret school policies is likely to grow this year. In light of the Trump’s administration efforts, some parents report that a teacher surveyed children about their preferred pronouns as the 2025-2026 school year approached. In Southern California, a lawyer recently alerted school board members about parents’ rights, even in light of Trump’s orders.
Trump’s January order specified that federal funding should be revoked from schools that support the social transition of minor students—particularly those that conceal this information from parents. Meanwhile, the U.S. Department of Education has launched an inquiry into California’s state law that prevents school officials from disclosing a child’s gender identity to their parents, which may conflict with requirements under the Family Education Rights Privacy Act (FERPA).
In the Santa Ana Unified School District, for example, an “Identity Support Plan” was designed to guide students on whether to disclose their identities to their families. A district presentation even mentioned discussing how students might handle family interactions during school events.
At a board meeting, legal counsel suggested that schools refrain from creating documents that might be required to be disclosed, given the complexities of enforcing executive orders in California’s legal environment, which often protects against discrimination based on gender identity.
A district board member expressed frustration, saying the current practices feel like a betrayal of public trust. Meanwhile, efforts are underway to have at least three cases reviewed by the Supreme Court, highlighting the struggle of parents to maintain authority over their children’s education regarding gender identity.
Restoring parental rights
Jeffrey Little John, whose daughter underwent a social transition at her Florida school without their knowledge, filed a lawsuit after realizing the situation. The school reportedly denied him access to records regarding meetings with his daughter.
Another family from Massachusetts, whose daughter also transitioned secretly at school, has brought forth urgent questions to the Supreme Court about the rights of secular parents to oppose gender ideology in these scenarios.
The petition emphasizes that millions of parents could be affected if protections against such policies are not established. It underscores that more than 1,000 public school districts have hidden transition policies that potentially harm children and violate parents’ rights.
Twenty-one states and Guam have submitted support for this position, asserting that actions taken by school committees breach the critical parent-child relationship. Advocates hope the courts will reinforce parental rights in directing their children’s education and development.
Some justices have shown interest in addressing these complex issues. Justice Kavanaugh, Alito, and Thomas previously sought to consider similar challenges related to district policies but were denied by other justices. The Court of Appeals had previously set a precedent by rejecting a case because none of the challengers had children affected directly under the policy.
This latest situation, however, presents a more compelling argument since it directly contradicts the wishes of parents regarding their children’s transitions. Experts believe the Supreme Court may soon tackle this growing concern, emphasizing the need for greater accountability in educational settings across the country.
