A California school district likely violated the First Amendment by forcing children to participate in an activity involving a book discussing the topic of gender identity without informing their parents first, a federal judge has ruled.
In a decision published Monday, Judge James Lorenz of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California ruled in favor of parents seeking a preliminary injunction against the Encinitas Union School District after students at La Costa Heights Elementary School were asked to read an LGBT-themed book unbeknownst to their parents.
Lorenz, an appointee of Democratic President Bill Clinton, forbids the school district from including topics related to sexual orientation and gender identity as part of its buddy program, which pairs older students with younger students as a type of mentorship.
Get Our Latest News for FREE
Subscribe to get daily/weekly email with the top stories (plus special offers!) from The Christian Post. Be the first to know.
While the school typically kept parents informed about what took place as part of the buddy program, parents were not notified when one week’s activity involved fifth-grade students and their kindergarten buddies watching a read-along video of the book My Shadow is Pink.
“My Shadow Is Pink is about a boy who liked to wear dresses and play with toys associated with girls,” the opinion noted. “Because the boy thought he did not ‘fit in’ with his family and peers, his shadow was pink rather than blue.”
The story involves “a conflict between the boy and his father,” the judge noted.
“The father eventually comes to accept his son’s ‘pink shadow’ not as a phase but as reflecting the boy’s ‘inner-most self,'” Lorenz wrote.
In addition to reading the book, fifth-grade students and their kindergarten buddies were asked to participate in an activity where the older student would ask the younger pupil what color their shadow was and then color their shadows on the ground with sidewalk chalk.
The lawsuit argued that the activity effectively forced students to tell their peers that it is possible to have a gender identity that does not correspond to one’s biological sex, even though their religious beliefs teach them otherwise.
State law requires that “If any part of a school’s instruction in health conflicts with the religious training and beliefs of a parent or guardian of a pupil, the pupil, upon written request of the parent or guardian, shall be excused from the part of the instruction that conflicts with the religious training and beliefs.”
While the school followed this policy when topics of sexual orientation and gender identity came up in health education lessons, plaintiffs contended that the school violated their deeply held religious beliefs by failing to abide by the law when it came to including My Shadow is Pink as part of the buddy program.
They also alleged violations of their First Amendment and due process rights under the U.S. Constitution.
“Compelling individuals to mouth support for views they find objectionable violates the First Amendment,” Lorenz added.
The judge ordered that “buddy program class activities and materials shall not cover gender identity topics covered in health instruction, unless Defendants provide parents with advance notice and an opportunity to opt out.”
In statements on Tuesday, the law firms representing the plaintiffs reacted to Monday’s preliminary injunction.
“No child should be forced to speak a message that violates his religious convictions,” said First Liberty Institute Senior Counsel Nate Kellum. “We are grateful for the court’s decision and will continue to fight to ensure that elementary children are not forced to participate in lessons about gender identity that violate their faith.”
National Center for Law & Policy President Dean Broyles believes the judge’s order “affirms that schools have a duty to notify parents and provide opt-outs when controversial gender ideology is taught.”
“[T]hey cannot avoid that duty by teaching the material in a mentoring program instead of health class,” stated Broyles.
The U.S. Supreme Court recently heard oral arguments in a case brought by parents of various faiths challenging the largest school district in Maryland after it refused to opt their children out of pro-LGBT readings. Lower courts ruled against the parents, and a ruling from the nation’s high court is expected by the end of June.
Ryan Foley is a reporter for The Christian Post. He can be reached at: ryan.foley@christianpost.com
