Sunday, October 26, 2025

Alito Scolds Lower Courts For Dodging Cases On Schools ‘Transing’ Kids Behind Parents’ Backs; Alito, Thomas, and Gorsuch Sound Alarm About Courts' Inaction On 'troubling' and 'tragic' State of Affairs for 'parents' Fundamental Rights'

Trump White House Archived/YouTube
Alito Scolds Lower Courts For Dodging Cases On Schools ‘Transing’ Kids Behind Parents’ Backs:
Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito had some choice words for some lower courts on Tuesday over their apparent eagerness to “avoid” ruling on cases involving schools “transing” children without their parents’ knowledge or consent.
The comments came in an order released by the high court on Tuesday that listed which pending lower court cases it will and will not be taking up in its 2025-2026 term. Among the cases rejected by the justices was Lee v. Poudre School District R-1, which centers around a lawsuit brought by two sets of parents against the Colorado-based Poudre School District R-1.
According to CBS News, “The families challenged policies implemented by the [school district] which they say urge district employees not to disclose information about a students’ [so-called] gender identity, including to parents.”
“In one instance,” the outlet reported, “the [Lee family’s] daughter … was urged to attend a meeting of the Gender and Sexualities Alliance at her middle school,” during which “a substitute teacher in the school district spoke about gender identity and sexual orientation, and warned students that it may not be safe to tell their parents about the discussion, according to court papers.”
A second student reportedly “had a similar experience at after-school GSA meetings.” This student also “told her parents she felt unsafe about being in the same building as a teacher who encouraged her to attend the GSA meetings, according to court filings.”
Both sets of parents filed a lawsuit against the school district, alleging that officials unlawfully interfered with their decision-making role as parents and therefore violated their 14th Amendment rights. The legal challenge was dismissed by the district court, a decision that was later upheld by the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals.
As a result, plaintiffs petitioned SCOTUS to take up the case, arguing that “America’s long history of protecting parents’ legal authority in raising their children is being deliberately dismantled by school districts across the country that have enacted policies to replace parental authority with governmental authority.” --->READ MORE HERE
Chip Somodevilla/Pool Photo via AP
Alito, Thomas, and Gorsuch sound alarm about courts' inaction on 'troubling' and 'tragic' state of affairs for 'parents' fundamental rights':
As the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear a Colorado case on the rights of parents to "direct the care, custody, and control of their children," three conservative justices agreed with the denial but nonetheless expressed concern about allegations of public schools encouraging or assisting a minor's gender transition "without parental knowledge."
In Jonathan Lee, et al. v. Poudre School District R-1, the petitioners — two sets of parents and two minor children — asked the high court in July to answer the question of whether a "school district may discard the presumption that fit parents act in the best interests of their children" and place itself in that role.
In a brief statement attached to SCOTUS' Tuesday orders list, Justice Samuel Alito led the charge, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, in encouraging lower courts to confront a "particularly contentious constitutional questio[n]" on parental rights, even as Alito and his colleagues ultimately agreed not to take up this particular 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals case at this time.
Months after Alito wrote the majority opinion siding with parents who wished to opt their children out of "LGBTQ+-inclusive" book-reading at public schools in Montgomery County, Maryland, the justice said the Lee petitioners failed to secure a writ of certiorari because they did not "challenge the ground for the ruling below."
The 10th Circuit had ruled the parents didn't "explain how policies that presume the district knows better than parents, or that discourage disclosure, directly caused district staff" to act in various ways, including: --->READ MORE HERE
If you like what you see, please "Like" and/or Follow us on FACEBOOK here, GETTR here, and TWITTER here.


No comments: