California

Court Blocks California ‘Gender Secrecy Law’ and Affirms Parental Rights

California parents scored a big victory as a court blocked a law that kept school districts from reporting a child’s “sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression” to parents. 

America First Legal announced the decision on behalf of the City of Huntington Beach and parents, saying: 

[T]he U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit entered a preliminary injunction blocking enforcement of key provisions of California’s AB 1955 – a law that prohibits schools from disclosing information to parents about a child’s sexual orientation, “gender identity,” or gender expression, unless the child consents.
In other words, the State of California sought to prevent parents from obtaining information about “gender transitions” of their own children without the child’s consent.

Governor Gavin Newsom signed AB 1955, the dishonestly named “SAFETY Act” (Support Academic Futures and Educators for Today’s Youth Act), in July 2024, as California Family Council (CFC) reported: 

This legislation, passed by the California Legislature and now signed into law, allows schools to withhold critical information from parents about their children’s health and welfare. The bill specifically prohibits school districts from enacting policies requiring parents to be notified if their child has asked everyone at school to use a different name and pronoun.

AB 1955 was predicated on the idea that children “have a constitutional right to privacy” thatforbade schools from requiring employees “to disclose any information related to a pupil’s sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression to any other person without the pupil’s consent.” 

Instead of affirming parents’ right to direct the upbringing of their children, the bill created a “government-imposed wall of secrecy between parents and their children,” CFC stated.  

Shortly after Governor Newsom signed the “gender secrecy law,” the Huntington Beach City Council voted to prohibit school employees from hiding information about students from their parents. The council passed an ordinance declaring Huntington Beach a “Parents’ Right to Know City.”

The ordinance led to the legal challenge against California, with America First Legal and SchaerrJaffee LLP filing a lawsuit in September 2024. 

The Ninth Circuit twice denied motions for preliminary injunctions against the law, but in light of the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Mirabelli v. Bonta, which reasserted parents’ rights over any school’s “transgender” parent exclusion policies, the city and parents asked the Ninth Circuit to reconsider. 

The three-judge panel said the Mirabelli decision “affirmed the substantive due process right of parents ‘to direct the upbringing and education of their children’” which “includes the right not to be shut out of participation in decisions regarding their children’s mental health” (their emphasis). 

When dealing with serious mental health issues related to children’s identity and sexuality, the Ninth Circuit panel explained: 

As framed by the Court, the plaintiff parents thus have an affirmative constitutional right to be provided with any such information.

CFC Vice President Greg Burt applauded the decision, saying: 

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.
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.

American First Legal said this is their second appeals court-level win following Mirabelli. The nonprofit law firm pointed to a case in Pennsylvania where the Pine Richland School District secretly provided “taxpayer-funded ‘gender transition teams’ to students without parental notification or consent.” 

A mom sued, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, again citing Mirabelli, said she could pursue a damage case against the school district. 

The California case is City of Huntington Beach v. Newsom. 

The Pennsylvania case is Doe v. Pine Richland School District.

Related articles and resources: 

Barrett v. Kagan: Key Takeaways From Supreme Court Ruling on ‘Transgender’ School Policies

BREAKING: Judge Issues Preliminary Injunction Says California School District Cannot Force Teachers to Lie to Parents About Their Children’s ‘Gender Identity’

California Family Council

California Teachers Told to Hide Information About Students’ ‘Gender’ From Parents – They’re Suing

California Schools May Not Hide Students’ ‘Gender Identity’ From Parents

‘Equipping Parents For Back-To-School’ – Updated Resource Empowers Parents

Supreme Court Affirms Parents’ Rights Over California’s ‘Transgender’ School Policies

Supreme Court Defends Religious Freedom, Parental Rights Over ‘LGBT’ Curriculum

California House Passes Bill Mandating Coverage for ‘Transgender’ Mutilation

The California Assembly doubled down on forcing medical coverage for dangerous and disfiguring “transgender” medical mutilation of individuals – including minors – who reject their innate, God-given sex. 

AB 1876 bans discrimination in health care insurance based on a person’s “sex,” along with other characteristics such as race, color, age or disability. It then redefines “sex” in health care plans “to include gender identity, sexual orientation, and related characteristics.” 

The bill sailed through two committees before passing the full Assembly, 56-17. An additional seven members had “No Vote Recorded,” which count for no votes in the legislature. 

California Family Council, a Focus on the Family-allied organization, explained AB 1876 was “framed as a ‘nondiscrimination’ measure,” adding: 

By redefining sex to include gender identity, sexual orientation, and related characteristics, the bill would prohibit insurers from denying or limiting coverage for procedures tied to gender transition if those procedures are covered in other contexts.

That means puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and irreversible surgeries would be treated as protected medical services, making it far more difficult for insurers to question their necessity, especially for minors. The bill also bans categorical exclusions for gender-transition procedures, effectively narrowing insurers’ ability to weigh long-term risks, evolving evidence, or patient age.

Dubbed the “Fair Care for All Act,” Assemblywoman Dawn Addis introduced AB 1876 in the Assembly Judiciary Committee, saying, “I’ll note that this is a priority bill of the LGBT caucus and sponsored by Equality California.” 

California’s LGBT caucus has 14 members, all Democrats, making up 12% of the entire Legislature and 16% of Democrat legislators. Equality California has tremendous influence in the state Legislature. The largest LGBT state advocacy group in the country, it is responsible for helping to propose and pass 205 bills and resolutions in California since its founding in 1999. 

The legislation was also supported by groups like Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California, the ACLU and Reproductive Freedom for All California. Planned Parenthood is the largest suppliers of opposite-sex hormones in the U.S., helping to destroy the reproductive capacity of more than 40,000 individuals in 2023 alone. “Reproductive freedom” evidently includes the “right” to remove healthy organs and mutilate one’s body. 

Addis said the mandate was necessary because of Trump administration actions to protect children from destructive gender ideology. 

Shortly after assuming office, President Donald Trump signed executive orders making it official government policy that there are only two genders: male and female and protecting children from chemical and surgical mutilation. 

These orders led the Department of Justice to target medical professionals and institutions that mutilate children with experimental “transgender” interventions that leave children sterile, sick and permanently damaged.

The president’s actions also led to the Department of Health and Human Services releasing an important report on the paucity of evidence for transgender medical interventions: Treatment for Pediatric Gender Dysphoria Review of Evidence and Best Practices. 

The agency evaluated 17 systematic reviews of chemical and surgical treatments inflicted on youth and found “significant risks – including irreversible harms such as infertility – while finding very weak evidence of benefit.”

But the California Legislature seems bent on promoting these harms – and forcing insurance providers to participate in the damage. 

California Family Council Vice President Greg Burt voiced the pro-family organization’s opposition to AB 1876: 

By treating an insurer’s denial of coverage as unlawful discrimination, AB 1876 removes insurers’ discretion to assess medical necessity, long-term risks, and evolving scientific evidence, particularly when the patient is a minor. 

These interventions carry serious lifelong consequences, including impacts on bone density, fertility, cardiovascular health, and neurological development. Surgical procedures performed on minors are permanent and irreversible.

He added that the bill also “raises serious religious liberty concerns, forcing employers and individuals to subsidize procedures that violate deeply held beliefs.” 

AB 1876 now moves on to the California Senate. 

Related articles and resources: 

For those struggling with transgenderism, and their families, Focus on the Family’s Counseling Department offers help from licensed counselors. To request a conversation with Focus on the Family’s Counseling Department, call 1-855-771-HELP (4357) weekdays from 6:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. (Mountain Time), or complete our Counseling Consultation Request Form. Please be prepared to leave your contact information for a counselor to return a call to you as soon as possible. The consultation is available at no cost to you due to generous donor support.

California Family Council

California Family Council: CA Bill Mandates Coverage of Sex-Rejecting Procedures for Minors

DOJ Targets Those Mutilating Children with ‘Transgender’ Drugs and Surgeries

HHS Releases Report on Harms of ‘Transgender’ Medical Interventions for Minors

Medicalizing Gender Confusion Makes Things Worse, New Research Confirms

Pam Bondi Directs DOJ Attorneys to Investigate Transgender Procedures for Minors

President Trump Signs Order Protecting Children From Transgender Medical Interventions

President Trump: ‘There are Only Two Genders: Male and Female’

ReFOCUS with Jim Daly: Addressing Gender Identity with Honesty and Compassion

ReFOCUS with Jim Daly: Chloe Cole: Gender Reassignment Surgery Regret

Sixteen States Sue Trump Administration for Protecting Children from ‘Trans’ Procedures

The WPATH Files – Transgender Interventions Are ‘Unethical Medical Experiments’

Woke Inclusivity is Really Radical Exclusion of Christians

According to her official bio published by the state of California, Jennifer Newsom, wife of Governor Gavin Newsom, is the “First Partner” of the state. To leave no confusion as to why she’s not listed as the “First Lady,” the posting explains the distinction is designed:

To send a signal of inclusivity, recognizing that one day there will be a woman or LGBTQ+ Governor of California, and to elevate the importance of partnership and the need for, and benefits of, a caring, inclusive government.

A 2022 interview with Mrs. Newsom has recently resurfaced on social media that only amplifies this worldview – and also adds context to the many challenges Christian believers are facing in today’s culture.

Speaking with Elex Michaelson, who was with Fox in 2022 but is now with CNN, the wife of the California governor was making an impassioned plea for why we can learn a whole lot from same-sex couples.

“Someone’s got to do the care work in a same-sex male couple,” she explained.“Someone’s got to do that, so I’m just going to do it. And … not be afraid or ashamed because it’s part of being human.”

She continued:

“We’re all on a spectrum, right? It’s just how society kind of pushes us and pressures us into these limiting gender roles. But again, the folks on the far right, [what] they’re missing is just this, they’re living in this silo, this evangelical conservative silo that ultimately is pulling us back as a country to a time and a place where we don’t deserve to be. And we’re not going to be, because honestly, young women and fathers of daughters are awake now and they’re woke, and they’re not going to let us go back.”

Mrs. Newsom said this resistance to traditional Christian beliefs filled her with “so much hope” and that when it comes to objections to these multi-millennia-old norms, “California has a huge responsibility to lead.”

There’s no question the Golden State has been on the leading edge when it comes to pushing “woke” policies that are hostile to conservative evangelical convictions.

From forcing pro-life clinics to advertise abortion and insurers to cover it, mandating schools include curriculum that not only affirms but elevates LGBT propaganda, banning counseling services for minors struggling with unwanted same-sex attraction, banning the alleged misuse of pronouns, and requiring faith-based adoption agencies to place children in homes led by same-sex couples, California has been a training ground for radical policies for a very long time.

But what is this “evangelical conservative silo” that Mrs. Newsom claims is dragging California and the world back to the dark ages?

Clearly, she’s taking issue with Christian believers who are advocating and championing biblical truths: that God made two genders, marriage is between one man and one woman, and it’s best when children are raised in the safety and security of their biological or adoptive mother and father.

Those who claim conservative evangelical convictions are somehow backwards or culturally dangerous appear ignorant of the instrumental, foundational influence those beliefs have had on society – including in California.

It was Spanish Christian missionaries who helped settle the state. In fact, the 21 original Catholic missions still exist. From San Francisco Solano in the north to San Diego in the south, the goal was to introduce the Native Americans already there and newly arriving people to a saving relationship with Jesus Christ. But the goal wasn’t only spiritual. From the conversions sprang a commercial revolution as the newly created colonial outposts helped establish trade and provisions for the growing population.

Over the years, this same Christian missionary zeal has led nationwide to the formation of hospitals and medical schools, nursing homes, adoption and child welfare agencies, the defense of human rights, the elevation of women from second-class status, and countless inventions and businesses that have changed the world.

This so-called “silo” is anything but exclusionary but is, instead, radically and dramatically inclusionary, and not a “silo” at all.

When was the last time a Christian hospital refused to treat a non-Christian? Have you ever heard about a Christian charity declining to help someone based on their ideological beliefs?

If Mrs. Newsom is so committed to “inclusivity” why is she so eager to exclude evangelical conservatives from the conversation?

University of California Schools: Students Must Bow to ‘Transgender’ Ideology

University of California schools are using sexual harassment and anti-discrimination training to force students and staff to affirm “transgender” ideology.

Young America’s Foundation first reported that mandatory training at the University of California, San Diego, required students to agree that sexually confused individuals should be allowed to use opposite sex bathrooms based on their “gender identity.”

According to YAF, students must bow down to transgender dogma, or they are blocked from taking classes.

The online program is called SHAPE – Sexual Harassment, Anti-Discrimination, Prevention and Education. It consists of a 60-75 minute training with a quiz at the end of the course.

As YAF explained, UC San Diego students were required “to agree the following scenario constitutes a ‘hostile environment.”

My name is Mona and I am transgender. My classmate Jane continues to call me James, which was my name before I transitioned. Jane refers to me as a man, and complains when I use the women’s restroom. I’ve asked her to stop but she does not. I feel very disrespected and want this to stop. What type of prohibited conduct can this be?

When students choose “Hostile Environment” as the correct answer, SHAPE explains that students must adhere to transgender ideology.

“Hostile Environment may be created when someone demands that others use a particular bathroom that does not correspond to their gender identity or uses the incorrect pronoun.

“Intentionally calling someone their name used prior to transition, as opposed to their lived name, is called dead-naming; and may be a form of sexual harassment.”

In other words, disagreeing with any aspect of transgender ideology creates a hostile environment.

But of course, this is simply speaking biological truth. One would think research universities, with their heavy emphasis on science, would know this.

The UC system violates first amendment rights by forcing students to use speech they disagree with, mandating acquiescence to beliefs that many people of faith reject, and censoring clear scientific thinking about sex and biology.

California Family Council (CFC), a Focus on the Family ally, detailed the origins of the training.

The University of California Office of the President states that SHAPE was “developed by UC Online in partnership with the Systemwide Office of Civil Rights,” and integrates directly with each campus’s online learning system to ensure full participation.

Campuses, including UC San Diego, UC Davis, UC Merced, UC Santa Cruz, UCLA, UC Berkeley, and UC Irvine, have all implemented the program.

CFC described the consequences for students who don’t agree with transgender dogma/

“According to UC Irvine, training is mandatory by the Office for Civil Rights at the University of California, Office of the President, to fulfill state law.

“Every student must earn a 100% score on the final quiz to pass. Failure to complete the program results in a registration hold, preventing enrollment for the next semester.”

Several UC schools, including Santa Cruz and Santa Barbara, use the training to show they are complying with Title IX of the Educational Amendments of 1972.

“No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any educational program or activity receiving federal financial assistance,” federal law states.

The state of California – and the UC system – make a mockery of Title IX by redefining biological sex to include the spurious concept of “gender identity.” One is an objective fact, the other a baseless belief system.

UC schools allow males to usurp women’s rights, robbing women of educational opportunities, sports victories, scholarships, privacy and safety.

“Once regarded as centers of critical thinking and open debate, these institutions are now conditioning students to affirm a narrow, politicized definition of truth,” CFC opined.

The organization encouraged students to stand up to the UC system’ denial of reality and censorship of opposing voices.

“However, do not let indoctrination training like this silence your voice. Refuse to submit to any authority that demands you compromise biblical conviction or deny biological truth. Instead, stand up and fight alongside the California Family Council.”

Related Articles and Resources

DOJ Lawsuit Describes California Department of Education’s Infuriating Treatment of Girls

Feds Sue California Department of Education, Interscholastic Federation For ‘Illegal Sex Discrimination’

Feds Pressure California After Boy Wins in Girls Track and Field Championship

Focus on the Family Transgender Resources

Shoving Girls Off the Podium: More Male Athletes Participating in Girls Sports

Transgender Ideology is Inherently Destructive

Trump Signs Executive Order Protecting Women’s Sports and Spaces

Image from Shutterstock.

Governor Newsom Endangers Children, Signs ‘License to Kidnap’ Act 

Governor Gavin Newsom signed AB 495 this week, legislation allowing any adult to sign an affidavit claiming to be a child’s relative and make medical and educational decisions for that child.

Parental rights activists dubbed the bill the “License to Kidnap Act” and “The California Trafficking Bill,” as it allows any individual to fill out a “Caregiver’s Authorization Affidavit” and claim to be a child’s relative. The affidavit offers no safeguards such as a background check, finger printing, notarization or parent signature.

California Family Council (CFC), a Focus on the Family ally, said the bill “fundamentally undermines parental rights and opens the door for abuse, kidnapping and government interference in family life.”

In a press release, Governor Newsom announced he had signed the bill “to protect parents’ rights and children,” adding, “Our children deserve to feel safe at home, in school and in the community. We are putting on record that we stand by our families and their right to keep their private information safe, maintain parental rights and help families prepare in case of emergencies.”

CFC President Jonathan Keller vehemently disagreed with that assessment, saying the bill betrayed parents and endangered children.

Governor Newsom is deliberately trying to deceive parents by claiming this bill protects them, when in fact it does the opposite. AB 495 strips parents of their constitutional rights and hands them over to unverified strangers.

It is unconstitutional, it is illegal, and no school or medical facility should recognize or accept the authority of a Caregiver’s Authorization Affidavit without a verified signature from a parent or legal guardian. Newsom knows exactly what this bill does, but he’s hoping the press and the public won’t read it for themselves.

Proponents of the bill said it was needed to protect children of illegal immigrants by allowing another family member to step in and make decisions for them if their parents were deported.

Dean Broyles, president and chief counsel of the National Center for Law & Policy, told CFC the affected all children – not just those whose parents entered the country illegally. He said the bill violated parents’ rights, lacked basic safeguards needed to protect children and was unconstitutional:

Governor Newsom deceptively describes AB 495 as a caregiver planning tool for undocumented immigrant parents. It’s more accurately described as a child trafficker’s and child predator’s dream bill.

Broyles added,

Its sweeping application is not limited to immigrant families, does not require any parental notice or consent, and lacks even the most basic safeguards to protect children. Anyone falsely claiming kinship can easily sign the affidavit, access a child, obtain medical care, and enroll them in another school. Even the most basic safeguard of a notary is not required to confirm the true identity of the person accessing your child.

AB 495 violates fundamentally constitutionally protected parental rights, endangers California’s children, and will be appropriately legally challenged and struck down.

CFC, a Focus on the Family ally, encouraged parents to take immediate action to protect their children:

  • Update emergency contact lists at schools and medical offices to include only those adults you trust to make educational and medical decisions for your child.
  • Submit written directives stating that no one outside your listed contacts is authorized to pick up or make decisions for your child.
  • Support efforts to legally challenge AB 495 and restore parental rights in California law.

Keller added CFC would challenge the act, saying, “We will work with our partners, our attorneys, and thousands of California parents to overturn this unconstitutional law. Parents, not politicians, are the rightful guardians of their children.”

Related Articles and Resources

Pastor Jack Hibbs: Horrific Bill Allows Adults to Take Custody of Children Without Consent

California Interscholastic Federation ‘Gender Diversity Toolkit’ Reveals Extent of Radical ‘Transgender’ Participation Policies

California Legislation Lets Courts Take Custody from Parents of Minors Who Seek ‘Transgender’ Treatments

California Legislation Would Decriminalize Killing Newborns

California Legislature Passes ‘License to Kidnap’ Act, Other Horrible Legislation

Feds Sue California Department of Education, Interscholastic Federation For ‘Illegal Sex Discrimination’

Gavin Newsom and the Dead-End Politics of the Sexual Revolution

Pastor Jack Hibbs: Horrific Bill Allows Adults to Take Custody of Children Without Consent

Image from Shutterstock.