The California Department of Education has abruptly taken its mandatory statewide LGBTQ+ teacher-training portal, PRISM, offline after whistleblowers and court filings revealed that the program contained directives requiring teachers to keep students’ gender identities secret from their parents. The move comes as California Attorney General Rob Bonta and the Department of Education face possible sanctions for allegedly misleading a federal court about continuing to enforce such secrecy policies.
The sudden shutdown of the PRISM portal, only days before a major summary-judgment hearing, has intensified scrutiny on state officials accused of concealing ongoing parental-exclusion directives while assuring judges and the public that these policies had been rescinded.
Two Teachers Sue to Stop “Gender Secrecy” Rules
The revelations are unfolding in Mirabelli v. Olson, a class-action lawsuit brought by Thomas More Society attorneys on behalf of two Escondido teachers, Elizabeth Mirabelli and Lori West. The teachers say they were ordered to deceive parents about whether their children were socially transitioning at school, and threatened with punishment if they refused.
Both women objected on religious and moral grounds to lying to parents and intentionally hiding significant information about a child’s identity. Their lawsuit now represents every California educator and parent who opposes Parental Exclusion Policies.
PRISM Training Quietly Embedded the Same Directives the State Claims Were Repealed
For the past year, California state officials, including the Attorney General, have argued that the lawsuit is moot because the controversial FAQ page promoting gender secrecy was removed from the CDE website.
But new evidence shows the policy wasn’t repealed at all—it was simply moved.
Thomas More Society attorneys gained access to the mandatory PRISM teacher training and discovered that:
- The CDE-authored courses included the same directives telling teachers to hide a student’s gender identity from parents.
- PRISM links educators to model policies from GLSEN, the ACLU, Our Family Coalition, and other groups that explicitly instruct:
“School staff shall not disclose any information that may reveal a student’s transgender status to others, including parents or guardians.” - These materials were distributed statewide under the letterheads of nineteen LGBTQ+ advocacy organizations sanctioned by the CDE.
“We now have irrefutable evidence that the CDE covertly moved these unconstitutional gender secrecy directives inside a password-protected training hidden away from public view, and distributed them to school districts statewide,” said Paul M. Jonna, Special Counsel at Thomas More Society and Partner at LiMandri & Jonna LLP.
After these revelations, the PRISM website was suddenly taken offline.
Bonta Claims the State Has “Changed” – But His Own Website Still Promotes Parental Exclusion
Even as Attorney General Bonta argues in court that the CDE is no longer telling teachers to keep secrets from parents, his own official website continues to publish the very same gender-secrecy directive.
Under the title “Know Your Rights: LGBTQ+ Discrimination Rights,” Bonta’s site states:
“Your school… doesn’t have the right to ‘out’ you as LGBTQ+ to anyone without your permission, including your parents.”
It further insists that:
“Even if you are ‘out’ about your sexual orientation or gender identity at school,… staff can’t tell your family that you are LGBTQ+ without your permission.”
This published guidance directly contradicts the State’s courtroom claim that secrecy policies have been rescinded or abandoned. Instead, it confirms that the Attorney General still publicly instructs California schools to withhold gender-identity information from parents, even minors at any age.
State Officials Withdraw Their Central Defense, Days Before the Hearing
Late last week, the State Education Defendants abruptly withdrew their key defense, that the case should be dismissed as “moot” because the FAQ was removed.
They now acknowledge that their retreat was prompted by issues raised involving the PRISM training.
The CDE says the presence of secrecy directives in PRISM was “simply an error.”
However, the timing, with PRISM going offline immediately after the exposure, has fueled accusations of intentional concealment.
Sanctions Now Loom Over State Officials
Judge Benitez has ordered the State to show why sanctions should not be imposed for misrepresenting the status of these policies to the court. Today’s hearing will determine:
- Whether California’s Parental Exclusion Policies violate teachers’ and parents’ constitutional rights;
- Whether state officials intentionally misled the court;
- Whether sanctions should be imposed on the CDE, the Attorney General’s office, or their attorneys.
CFC Reaction: “The Deception Is Clear.”
“This entire situation shows a shocking level of deception from both the Department of Education and Attorney General Bonta,” said Greg Burt, Vice President of California Family Council. “They told the court that these secrecy policies were gone, yet Bonta’s own website still instructs schools not to tell parents. And all the while, they quietly pushed the same directives through PRISM statewide. We hope Judge Benitez sees through this and rules clearly in favor of parental rights and religious liberty.”
