Well, it finally happened. California has become the first state to weaponize the government against parental rights in order to push the progressive trans agenda as Gov. Gavin Newsom signed Assembly Bill 1955 into law. The bill prohibits school districts from requiring schools to inform parents if their children change their gender identity.
This development comes amid a national debate about schools promoting transgenderism among students. The law is ostensibly aimed at protecting trans-identified students.
AB 1955, also known as the “Support Academic Futures and Educators for Today’s Youth Act," is supposedly aimed at preventing the “forced outing” of a child to their parents.
The bill, if passed, would bar school employees and contractors from disclosing a student’s sexual orientation or gender identity to anyone without the student’s consent unless it is required by law. Schools would not be allowed to enforce any policy mandating this information to be disclosed.
An employee or a contractor of a school district, county office of education, charter school, or state special school for the blind or the deaf shall not be required 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 unless otherwise required by state or federal law.
The bill further states that “[p]olicies that forcibly ‘out’ pupils without their consent remove opportunities for LGBTQ+ young people and their families to build trust and have these conversations when they are ready.”
The legislation would also mandate periodic updates of resources to support parents, guardians, and families of LGBTQ+ students. The bill claims that “[a]ffirming school environments significantly reduce the odds of transgender youth attempting suicide, according to The Trevor Project Research Brief: LGBTQ & Gender-Affirming Spaces.”
The new law targets school districts that have flouted the state government by requiring teachers and school staff to notify parents if a student indicates they wish to alter their gender identity.
In August 2023, California Attorney General Rob Bonta filed a lawsuit against Chino Valley Unified School District for enacting such a policy.
California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta filed a lawsuit Monday against the Chino school district, ordering an end to a policy that requires notifying parents if their children change their gender identity, alleging it is discriminatory and violates civil rights and privacy laws.
The “parental notification” policy, which has been proposed by a handful of conservative-leaning districts in California, puts transgender and gender-nonconforming students in “danger of imminent, irreparable harm” by potentially forcibly “outing” them at home before they’re ready, according to the lawsuit.
“They are in real fear that the district’s policy will force them to make a choice: either ‘walk back’ their constitutionally and statutorily protected rights to gender identity and gender expression, or face the risk of emotional, physical and psychological harm from non-affirming or unaccepting parents or guardians,” states the lawsuit, which asks the San Bernardino County Superior Court to immediately ban the practice.
This is not the only law California’s legislature has entertained that is aimed at violating parental rights. In September 2023, the Assembly passed a measure that would punish parents for failing to affirm their child’s chosen gender identity. The bill would have classified non-affirmation as child abuse, which could have led to the state removing the child from the home. Fortunately, in a shocking turn of events, Gov. Newsom vetoed the bill. But this does not mean California’s Democrats won’t try again.
The debate over this law, as well as others, has been particularly fierce. When Democratic lawmakers were busy ramming the bill through, the situation nearly devolved into actual fisticuffs.
According to Capitol correspondent Ashley Zavala, in Essayli's floor speech, he likened the Democrat leadership to "the Communist Party" of California and compared them to an oligarchy. Things devolved from there. After a failed vote that would have allowed Essayli to continue to debate the bill, Essayli then challenged Assemblymember Rick Chavez Zbur (D-LA) on a point of order and stated that he received a second to his motion from Assemblywoman Kate Sanchez (R-Murietta). Jackson decided to challenge him on this. Essayli then said, "What are you going to do about it?" This is when Jackson quickly exited his seat and tried to make a beeline for Essayli before being held back by his colleagues.
Several Californians have spoken out against the blatant attack on parental rights.
Tara and I was to send a huge thank you to everyone who showed up, called and allowed us to represent you for the hearing on #AB1955. The bill may have passed the committee but the energy from our community was impeccable 🤌🏻
— Denise Aguilar (@InformedMama209) June 27, 2024
It’s clear we all have had just about enough of these… pic.twitter.com/QxMSylN3sm
Tara and I was to send a huge thank you to everyone who showed up, called and allowed us to represent you for the hearing on #AB1955. The bill may have passed the committee but the energy from our community was impeccable 🤌🏻
— Denise Aguilar (@InformedMama209) June 27, 2024
It’s clear we all have had just about enough of these… pic.twitter.com/QxMSylN3sm
The worst of Newsom's California is the attack on our children & parental rights.
— Tara Thornton (@PioneerMama) July 1, 2024
AB665 goes into effect today, July 1, 2024.
AB665 removes the due process requirement of proof of abuse or neglect to remove parental rights & emancipate a child out of the family home.
Under… pic.twitter.com/7viwJCxh6o
Unfortunately, this trend probably won’t be limited to California. As red states implement policies to protect parental rights, blue states are working hard to usurp the role of the parent in deciding what is best for their children.
What this means is that governments dominated by progressives will create an environment in which children are not just allowed to explore other aspects of their gender identity, they will be encouraged to do so behind their parents’ backs. Many of these children go through social “transitions” in which they use different names, choose different pronouns, and wear clothing that reflects their chosen gender identity.
Progressives are motivated by the belief that children should not belong to their parents, but to the state. They will stop at nothing until this becomes a reality, and the passage of this law is proof.
