Attorneys with the Thomas More Society have urgently petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to step into the federal lawsuit Mirabelli v. Bonta and halt California’s controversial school “gender secrecy” policies that keep parents in the dark about their children’s gender issues. The emergency application was filed after a panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals paused a district court ruling that struck down those policies, effectively restoring California’s rules that prevent educators from notifying parents when students request changes in pronouns, names, or gender identity at school.
The policies at issue stem from Assembly Bill 1955, signed by Governor Gavin Newsom, which critics say forces teachers and school staff into deception by requiring them to conceal “gender transitions” from parents if students request confidentiality. This compulsion not only undermines parental authority but raises profound moral concerns for families who object on religious or biblical grounds to withholding such fundamental information.
The legal battle began in 2023 when two Christian teachers challenged California’s directives as unconstitutional. They argued that being forced to conceal truth from parents violated their First Amendment rights, including freedom of speech and free exercise of religion. Later, multiple parents joined the suit, asserting that their rights to direct the upbringing and care of their children were being trampled. One couple’s daughter was treated at school as a boy for almost a year under a different name and pronouns without their knowledge, a situation they only discovered after their child suffered a suicide attempt, underscoring the potential danger of state-imposed secrecy.
In December 2025, U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez issued a permanent injunction blocking enforcement of these secrecy rules statewide for parents and educators in the certified class, ruling that California’s approach unlawfully interfered with parental rights and compelled speech from teachers. However, California Attorney General Rob Bonta appealed, and on January 5, 2026, a three-judge Ninth Circuit panel granted a stay of the injunction, allowing the contested policies to go back into effect while the case winds through the courts.
In their Supreme Court filing, Thomas More Society attorneys argue that the lower appeals court ignored legal precedent and factual errors, and that the stakes could not be higher. They assert that California is effectively inserting the state between parents and their children, using public schools to keep families unaware of critical decisions affecting health, identity, and well-being. Special counsel Paul M. Jonna described the state’s approach as a “parental deception scheme” that inflicts irreparable harm and strips parents of their core authority over their children’s most intimate and developmentally significant issues.
The petition also seeks a broader en banc reconsideration by the full Ninth Circuit, showing the legal team’s determination to press on multiple fronts. Should the Supreme Court grant the emergency application, it could restore the district court’s injunction and reaffirm that parents, not government bureaucrats, have the final say in the upbringing and moral formation of their children. If the justices decline, the policies could remain in place and serve as a model for similar “gender secrecy” mandates elsewhere, further eroding parental rights and traditional notions of family oversight in favor of state-imposed directives.
This case highlights the ongoing clash between parental rights, religious conscience, and state power in the classroom. Advocates for the policies argue they protect vulnerable children from unsupportive families, but critics counter that true safety and flourishing come from transparency, parental involvement, and fidelity to biblical principles that place parents as the primary shepherds of their children’s hearts and minds.
