The bill would ban “forced outing” of LGBTQ students to their parents

On Wednesday, May 22, San Diego State Assemblyman Chris Ward introduced legislation that would require school districts and charter schools to keep students’ gender identity and sexual orientation private amid legal disputes – including in San Diego County – over what schools should and shouldn’t say. parents of LGBTQ+ students.

Assembly Bill 1955 would prohibit any policy requiring public school employees to notify parents or otherwise disclose information about a student’s gender identity, gender expression or sexual orientation to anyone without the student’s consent – what supporters call forced exit. The only exception would be if an employee determined the student was at reasonable risk of harm to himself, Ward said.

The bill would invalidate any policies already adopted by school districts across the state, such as Chino Valley Unified, which was sued by the attorney general last year for requiring parents to be notified if a student asks to be addressed by a different name or pronouns.

Ward said he knows of about a dozen such districts in California that have adopted similar notification policies. The bill would also prohibit retaliation against teachers who choose not to follow the current rules.

LGBTQ+ advocates argue that such required notification policies could jeopardize students’ safety if their families do not consent, and could deprive students of the chance to safely learn about their identity and come out on their own terms. The state Department of Education has said the state constitution guarantees students the right to privacy in such matters and has instructed school districts to keep students’ gender identity private.

“Our constitution already guarantees an individual’s right to privacy,” said Ward, vice president of the California LGBTQ Legislative Caucus. “Everyone has the right to go out on their own terms.”

Meanwhile, opponents of state policy argue that parents have the right to know what is happening to their child and that it is important to them for the health and well-being of the child.

Ward said this bill is needed to clarify state laws because judges have issued conflicting rulings on the issue.

Last year, for example, a San Bernardino County Superior Court judge temporarily blocked the notification policy of Chino Valley Unified, which had recently changed its policy to remove references to gender identity. The case is still pending.

But also last year, a federal judge in San Diego temporarily blocked a local school district’s policy that did the opposite and protected students’ privacy from required notice.

In this case, two teachers filed a lawsuit because Escondido Union School District policy prohibited them from informing parents about students who were or may be transgender or gender non-conforming.

Two teachers who identified themselves as Catholic and Christian, respectively, argued that it violated their First Amendment rights.

Judge Roger Benitez also found in granting a temporary injunction that the new policy violated parents’ Fourteenth Amendment right to care, guide and make health care decisions for their children.

The rights of transgender students are the subject of disputes across the country, not only over what privacy protections schools can or should provide, but also what bathrooms students can use and what sports teams they can play on. The U.S. Supreme Court has so far remained silent on the issue, choosing not to take up cases on all three issues.

With the case still pending in court, “it’s getting confusing and there’s some ambiguity,” Ward said. “Updating our state statute will provide clarity and guidance that everyone can follow.”