Mirabelli v. Bonta

Background

Parents and two teachers sued California officials and a school district after schools followed state policies about students’ gender identity. The policies limited schools from telling parents about a child’s gender transition without the child’s consent and required use of the child’s preferred name and pronouns. A federal district court sided with parents and teachers and issued a permanent injunction enforcing parental notification and parents’ name/pronoun instructions. The Ninth Circuit stayed that injunction pending appeal.

Reasoning

The Supreme Court vacated the Ninth Circuit’s stay as to the parents. It concluded parents who claim religious objections are likely to win on their First Amendment free exercise claim because the policies substantially interfere with parents’ religious duties to guide their children. The Court also found parents likely to succeed on Fourteenth Amendment claims protecting parents’ right to direct their children’s upbringing and medical decisions. The Court said the State’s safety and privacy arguments do not appear narrowly tailored and that denying enforcement during appeal would cause irreparable harm to parents.

Real world impact

Because the stay was vacated for parents, the district-court injunction will take effect for objecting parents while the appeals continue, meaning schools are to avoid concealing gender-transition steps and to follow parental directions on names and pronouns in covered cases. The decision is interim: appeals are ongoing and the final outcome could change.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Barrett (joined by two Justices) concurred in the result; Justices Thomas and Alito would have gone further; Justice Sotomayor would have denied relief. Justice Kagan dissented, warning the Court short-circuited normal appellate process and urging full merits review on the regular docket.