In California, a contentious debate has emerged within the realm of partisan politics during a presidential election cycle, and the outcome could have a significant impact on the election.
California Governor Gavin Newsom recently signed a new law that prohibits school districts from mandating staff to inform parents if their child begins to express a different gender identity at school.
“There are instances where revealing a child’s gender identity without their consent can be harmful and even dangerous,” stated Tony Hoang, the executive director of Equality California, which advocated for the legislation.
The push for this law came after some school districts in the state implemented policies requiring mandatory reporting. Hoang refers to these policies as “forced outing.”
“These forced outing policies take away the opportunity for a young person to have important discussions with their families when they feel ready,” he explained.
The Liberty Justice Center has filed a lawsuit against state leaders, including Newsom, Attorney General Rob Bonta, and State Superintendent Tony Thurmond, alleging that the law violates parents’ rights to direct the care of their children under the 14th Amendment.
“It also infringes upon their First Amendment right to freely practice their religion,” stated Emily Rae, senior counsel for Liberty Justice Center. “These parents believe in the traditional understanding of gender and view allowing their child to transition without their knowledge as conflicting with their religious beliefs.”
RELATED STORY | Biden’s Title IX law expanding protections for LGBTQ+ students now blocked in 10 states
Scott Davison, a parent in California and legislative affairs director for a group opposing the new law, believes the core issue revolves around whether parents should be informed if their child is coping with a mental health challenge, which he associates with a change in gender identity. Major medical associations contend that there is no scientific basis for this perspective.
Davison points to a reevaluation of the Dutch Protocol, a framework for providing gender-affirming care, in Europe. Several European countries have reconsidered their approach to gender-affirming care for adolescents, moving away from prescribing puberty blockers as the standard treatment.
However, the California law does not pertain to puberty blockers; it specifically addresses whether school staff should disclose to parents if a child is using different pronouns or a different name at school.
RELATED STORY | Sexual orientation, gender identity can be discussed in Fla. schools
Criticism of the Dutch Protocol does not negate the findings of numerous studies endorsed by leading medical authorities, such as the American Medical Association and the American Psychological Association, which confirm that being transgender is not a mental disorder and that gender-affirming approaches can lower the risk of suicide and depression.
This policy debate occurs as the GOP seeks to attract LGBTQ+ voters this autumn. Former first lady Melania Trump recently hosted a fundraiser for Log Cabin Republicans, and Trump advisor Richard Grenell aims to secure 50% of the gay vote for Donald Trump.
A GLAAD poll in January revealed that Joe Biden held a significant lead over Trump among LGBTQ+ voters. The battle over California’s policy could hinder the GOP’s efforts to sway some of those voters.
“Californians believe that our schools should be a safe environment for students to thrive and should not become embroiled in larger cultural disputes,” Hoang emphasized.
