The Federalist Society hosted a webinar on Monday to discuss the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent ruling in Mirabelli v. Bonta and its potential impact on parental rights, religious liberty and public school policies involving student gender identity.
The webinar, titled “Are Secret Gender Transition Policies Unconstitutional? Mirabelli v. Bonta and the New Frontier in Parental Rights,” examined whether policies allowing school officials to withhold information from parents violate constitutional protections.
The panelists included Peter Breen, executive vice president and head of litigation at the Thomas More Society; John Bursch, senior counsel and vice president of appellate advocacy at the Alliance Defending Freedom; and Sarah Parshall Perry, vice president and senior legal fellow at Defending Education.
In a 6-3 decision on March 2, the Supreme Court ruled California’s policy violated the First and 14th Amendments.
The case challenged guidance that critics described as “gender secrecy” policies that allowed school officials to withhold information from parents about students’ requests to change names, pronouns or their gender identity at school.
“The State argues that its policies advance a compelling interest in student safety and privacy,” the majority wrote. “But those policies cut out the primary protectors of children’s best interests: their parents.”
During the webinar, Breen, the attorney who represented the case, said the dispute centers on whether educators should take actions affecting students’ mental health or well-being without parental knowledge.
“This is really a no-brainer, you know, to some extent, for anyone who’s got kids,” Breen said. “You just don’t expect your teachers to be doing things to your children in regards to their mental health or their health generally, without you knowing.”
Breen also said the legal battle may continue despite the ruling, noting California filed an emergency motion last week seeking to modify the Supreme Court’s order.
Perry said parental authority has long been recognized in American law.
“We have a long-standing tradition of recognizing the strength of those familial bonds and the importance of a parent’s right to actually direct their child’s upbringing, both in education and beyond,” Perry said.
Perry also argued that social gender transitions in schools carry broader implications.
“Social transition is not a neutral intervention,” she said.
Perry said disputes over gender identity policies in public education could increasingly intersect with religious liberty claims and broader debates over medical care related to gender identity.
“We’re going to see, I think, a battle on perspectives from the expansion of so-called gender identity within public education and within healthcare,” Perry said. “And on the other side, what that does to the religious liberty interest.”
Bursch noted that some future parental rights cases may rely less exclusively on religious arguments, suggesting courts could extend similar protections to parents with moral, ethical or medical objections to school policies.
The Center Square reached out to Equality California for a comment, but has not received a response.
