Parents filed suit against the school district under Arizona’s Parents’ Bill of Rights, A.R.S. § 1-602. The case involved a junior high school student who, with the support of the school and the district’s policies, was using a boy’s name instead of her given name. Parents learned of this so-called “in-school gender transition,” objected, and the school initially told the parents that teachers would abide by the parents’ express request that the child be referred to only by her given name.

The court reversed the trial court’s ruling that the case was moot because the child had moved to a different school. So what? The parent has the right to sue for past interference and to seek declaratory relief to prevent further violations. The school also argued the suit was untimely. The court partially agreed. Although the parents initially learned of the issue more than a year before the suit was filed, the school later falsely reassured them that it would stop. It didn’t, and that second violation triggered a new accrual date. A few cleanup issues: the superintendent was named in her official capacity, making her a redundant defendant; the board member who brought her own claim lacks authority and standing to claim she was denied the right to vote on the policies, which were implemented before she was elected.

We expect more of these lawsuits brought by parents for in-school gender transitions. This is a minefield for schools to navigate, and attorneys have started advertising for these cases. This case is its own advertisement.

link to opinion