Federal appeals court reverses course after Supreme Court’s Mirabelli ruling, holding that AB 1955 forbids the very parental notification policies the Constitution requires
A federal appeals court has handed parents a major victory. On June 18, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit blocked enforcement of key provisions of AB 1955, California’s law barring school districts from requiring parents to be told when their child adopts a different gender identity at school. The court ruled that the Constitution protects a parent’s right to know, and that California’s law forbids what the Constitution demands.
The case is City of Huntington Beach v. Newsom. A three-judge panel granted a preliminary injunction protecting seven parent-plaintiffs from enforcement of Sections 5 and 6 of AB 1955. The same panel had twice denied this relief before. What changed was the United States Supreme Court.
In Mirabelli v. Bonta, the Supreme Court held that California’s school gender secrecy policies likely violate parents’ rights under the Free Exercise Clause and the Due Process Clause. The Ninth Circuit applied that ruling here. As the panel put it, “In light of Mirabelli, AB 1955 thus forbids the mandatory policies that the Constitution requires.”
The court grounded its decision on a principle older than the disputed policies themselves. Quoting the Supreme Court, the panel wrote that “parents—not the State—have primary authority with respect to the upbringing and education of children.” That authority, the court explained, includes “the right not to be shut out of participation in decisions regarding their children’s mental health.” When a child shows signs of gender distress at school, parents have a constitutional right to be told.
The panel also rejected California’s central argument. The State claimed the parents lacked standing because they could not prove their own children would identify as transgender, ask the school for secrecy, and have that request honored. The court was not persuaded. Parents who object to the secrecy policies, the panel held, “very likely have standing because they are objects of the challenged exclusion policies,” with no need for “any individualized showing as to whether a particular parent’s child was likely to exhibit gender dysphoria.”
On the harm to families, the court was direct. “The deprivation of constitutional rights constitutes irreparable harm.” And on where the public interest lies, the panel adopted the Supreme Court’s words: an injunction here “promotes child safety by guaranteeing fit parents a role in some of the most consequential decisions in their children’s lives.”
Years in the Making
This ruling did not come from nowhere. The California Family Council has fought for parental notification for years, against fierce opposition. Working with a coalition of parental rights groups, CFC helped draft a model policy to notify parents when their child is recognized at school under a different gender, with a new name and new pronouns. Ten school districts passed versions of that policy. Sacramento responded with AB 1955, a law designed to shut down those policies.
Chino Valley Unified School District, led by board president Sonja Shaw, was the first school board to introduce a policy against the secret gender transition of students. She was ecstatic about this week’s ruling.
“Parents have a constitutional and God-given right to the upbringing of their children. When CVUSD passed a parental notification policy, the state came after us hard. … We didn’t back down,” said Shaw, who is currently running for California State Superintendent of Public Instruction against an opponent who testified for the state in the Mirabelli case. “[This] ruling is a major win for parents everywhere who believe schools should not operate behind closed doors. This is about accountability, transparency, and restoring parental authority.”
The legal fight ran a long road. Parents and teachers challenged the secrecy regime in federal court in Escondido in Mirabelli v. Olson, and won. The Ninth Circuit stayed that win. Then the Supreme Court stepped in, vacated the stay, and held that California’s policies likely violate the Constitution. That decision in Mirabelli is now the foundation under this latest ruling against AB 1955.
Thomas More Society represents the parents and teachers in Mirabelli, the civil rights class action that reached the Supreme Court. The firm welcomed the Ninth Circuit’s decision.
“Yesterday, the Ninth Circuit enjoined AB 1955, California’s ban on school districts passing policies to advise parents about their child’s gender presentation at school, holding that, ‘In light of Mirabelli, AB 1955… forbids the mandatory policies that the Constitution requires,'” said Paul M. Jonna, Special Counsel for Thomas More Society and Partner at LiMandri & Jonna LLP. “This decision is a direct result of the courage of our clients who challenged California’s gender secrecy regime back in 2023.”
“The Supreme Court’s historic decision in Mirabelli makes clear that parents cannot be kept in the dark about their own children’s ‘gender identity’ at school,” Jonna added. “Every state law that interferes with parental rights in this way violates Mirabelli—and we are very pleased that the Ninth Circuit got this right by declaring AB 1955 unconstitutional.”
The City of Huntington Beach and the plaintiff parents were represented by America First Legal with co-counsel Schaerr Jaffe. Nick Barry, Senior Counsel at AFL, called the ruling a vindication.
“The Ninth Circuit’s decision is a powerful vindication of parental rights,” Barry said. “California cannot use state law to force schoolteachers and administrators into a conspiracy of silence against parents. California’s law, and similar school policies, use state coercion to intentionally interfere with the parent-child relationship and separate a child from their parent. That is wrong and unlawful. The Constitution is clear — parents have the right to know what is happening with their children and make decisions regarding their mental health, and no state law can override that fundamental protection.”
What This Means for California Families
Greg Burt, Vice President of the California Family Council, said the ruling confirms what CFC has argued all along.
“For years, Sacramento told parents they had no right to know when their own child was living as a different sex at school. We said that was wrong and that it violated the Constitution. The Ninth Circuit now agrees,” Burt said. “AB 1955 was built to keep moms and dads in the dark. This ruling pulls back the curtain. No parent should have to learn from a stranger what the school already knew about their child.”
“This fight is not over,” Burt added. “The State has fought parents at every turn, and the injunction so far protects only the families who sued. But the direction is clear. Parents have a constitutional right to raise their own children, and that right does not stop at the schoolhouse door.”
The fight is indeed far from finished. The injunction is preliminary, and it shields only the seven plaintiff parents while their appeal proceeds. Attorney General Rob Bonta is still appealing the underlying Mirabelli judgment in the Ninth Circuit, and his office has repeatedly said it expects to prevail, calling an earlier stay a measure that “protects vulnerable students and avoids confusion for teachers and schools while we appeal.” Bonta has long maintained that parental notification policies violate students’ privacy and civil rights. After years of being told they had no voice, California parents have now heard a federal court say otherwise, but the State has given no sign it intends to back down.
