Great news for parents from the Supreme Court

Parents Have the Right to Know

Connecticut Schools Are Playing a Dangerous Game With the Constitution

A fundamental question is confronting Connecticut schools and state officials:

Do parents have the right to know what is happening to their children at school?

For generations, the answer in American law has been clear. Yes.

But policies promoted by the Connecticut Department of Education—and defended by Attorney General William Tong—are pushing schools to do something extraordinary: hide major identity decisions from parents.

Those policies are not just bad public policy. They are increasingly unconstitutional.

Secret Gender Transitions in Connecticut Schools

Across Connecticut, school staff have been and continue to encourage and facilitate what is often called a “social transition” for students who identify as a different gender.

This can include:

• Calling a student by a new name or pronouns
• Allowing the student to present as the opposite sex at school
• Changing how the student is recorded in school systems
• Creating a second identity for the student at school

And in some cases, parents are deliberately kept in the dark.

Teachers and administrators are told that if a child does not want their parents to know, the school should respect the child’s “privacy.”

Think about what that means.

A child could be living as one identity at school and a completely different identity at home—with government employees managing the secret.

This turns the parent-child relationship upside down.

Schools exist to educate children, not to replace parents.

A battle of briefs between FIC and Attorney General Tong

One of the most important cases is Foote v. Ludlow School Committee, where parents alleged that school officials socially transitioned their children at school while hiding that information from. The case involves a Connecticut mother whose children attended a Massachusetts public school. Family Institute of Connecticut was there on the ground floor and filed a brief supporting our sister organization in Massachusetts defending parental rights.

Rather than defend parental rights, William Tong joined other state attorneys general siding with the school district and defending the ability of schools to conceal gender identity information from parents.

In other words, Connecticut’s top law enforcement official intervened against a Connecticut mom who was simply asking to be informed about what was happening to both of her children at school.

But courts are increasingly skeptical of these policies and in the case of the Supreme Court, these policies are very likely unconstitutional.

Recent rulings suggest that schools may be violating the constitutional rights of parents to direct the upbringing of their children—a principle recognized for over a century in Supreme Court decisions like Meyer v. Nebraska, Pierce v. Society of Sisters, and Troxel v. Granville. And this week! the Supreme Court issued a per curium decision in Mirabelli v Bonta notifying California that their policy, similar to Connecticut’s, was likely unconstitutional based on 1st and 14th amendment rights of parents.

When government officials hide major decisions about a child from their parents, they are stepping into territory the Constitution reserves for families.

Connecticut’s Pattern of Excluding Parents

Unfortunately, Connecticut lawmakers have repeatedly moved in the direction of cutting parents out of major decisions involving their children.

Take abortion.

Most states require parental notification or consent before a minor obtains an abortion.

Connecticut does not.

Legislation such as Connecticut House Bill 5309 seeks to restore a basic safeguard by requiring that at least one parent be notified when a minor seeks pregnancy-related medical services. Family Institute of Connecticut is grateful for the public hearing opportunity this week and asks all of our members to contact their legislators on this important bill.

Parental Notification should not be controversial. Parents are expected to guide their children through every major life decision—from medical care to education. FIC is exploring whether Connecticut parents who have a “religious objection” to their child obtaining a secret abortion now have a constitutional right to receive notification by medical professionals and whether Connecticut would be able to meet a “strict scrutiny” standard for their “unconsented facilitation” of abortion under the Mirabelli and Mahmoud standards.

In Connecticut, the state increasingly treats parents as obstacles instead of guardians.

School Boards Must Act Now

Local school boards should not assume that guidance from the state Department of Education or model policies from the Connecticut Association of Boards of Education will shield them from legal liability.

Many districts have adopted CABE model policies that encourage school staff to keep a student’s gender identity confidential from parents if the student requests it. These policies often allow staff to create separate school identities for students, alter records, and facilitate social transitions without parental notification.

School boards should recognize the legal danger here.

If courts determine that these practices violate the constitutional rights of parents, districts that adopted or enforced these policies could face serious legal exposure.

A Call for Immediate Policy Review

We urge every Connecticut school board to review their district policies immediately.

Specifically, boards should:

• Conduct a public review of any policies addressing gender identity and student privacy
• Examine whether those policies instruct staff to conceal information from parents
• Consult legal counsel about potential constitutional risks
• Revoke or revise any CABE model policies that encourage hiding gender identity information from parents

Transparency with families is not optional. It is a core principle of public education.

Parents are not adversaries to be managed.

They are the primary guardians responsible for the care, development, and well-being of their children.

The Principle Connecticut Must Rediscover

This debate ultimately comes down to a simple truth:

Children are best protected by their families—not the government.

Schools should treat every student with dignity and compassion.

But compassion does not require secrecy.

And it certainly does not authorize government employees to step into the role of mother or father.

If Connecticut school districts continue following policies that hide critical information from parents, they may soon discover what courts have long recognized:

The Constitution protects parents.