The Supreme Court decided not to hear an appeal regarding a Wisconsin school district’s transgender support policy, which parents claim is being concealed from them.
On Monday, the Supreme Court declined to take up an appeal from a group of parents who allege their Wisconsin school district is concealing transgender support plans for students from parents. This decision was met with dissent from three conservative justices—Brett Kavanaugh, Samuel Alito, and Clarence Thomas—who expressed willingness to hear the case.
Although the Supreme Court did not provide reasoning for its decision, a lower court had previously ruled against the parents, citing a lack of standing since the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate that the district’s policy directly impacted their children. Justice Alito, expressing concern, noted, “I am concerned that some federal courts are succumbing to the temptation” to use standing as a means “to avoid particularly contentious constitutional questions.”
The Eau Claire Area School District maintains that the gender support policies are documented in student records, which are accessible to parents. According to the district, these policies are designed “to provide support to students who express concern about their gender identity.” Meanwhile, the group of parents known as Parents Protecting Our Children argued that these policies enable “gender identity transitions at school” and that such measures are “hidden from parents who would disagree that it is in their child’s best interest.”
This Wisconsin case emphasizes the ongoing debate about parental rights and the criteria required to challenge governmental actions. According to Steve Vladeck, a CNN Supreme Court analyst, and Georgetown University Law Center professor, “The issue in the Wisconsin case is less about the underlying question of parental rights and more about what plaintiffs have to show before they’re allowed to challenge government actions that may not have happened and may not ever happen.”
Previously, the Supreme Court denied a similar appeal from parents in suburban Washington who raised the same concerns. For these groups, the critical challenge is proving specific harm caused by the policy. In the Wisconsin case, both a federal district court and the Chicago-based 7th US Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the school district. Judge Michael Scudder remarked that the lawsuit was filed almost immediately after the school district’s new guidelines were introduced, pulling the courts into complex and emotionally charged issues regarding gender identity.
The Supreme Court’s refusal to hear the case leaves unresolved the balance between school policies and parental rights in matters of gender identity. The court’s decision underscores the challenges parents face in proving standing to challenge school policies.
Source: CNN
