A Constitutional Challenge to California’s Gender Identity Policy is Sustained in Regino v. Staley

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued a significant ruling in Regino v. Staley, No. 23-15070, on May 17, 2025, reviving a constitutional challenge to a California school district’s policy of not disclosing a student’s asserted gender identity to parents without the student’s consent.

The case arose after Aurora Regino, a mother in the Chico Unified School District, alleged that her child’s middle school had socially transitioned her child’s gender without her knowledge and pursuant to an official district policy of withholding such information from parents.  On January 6, 2023, Regino filed suit in the U.S. District Court against District Superintendent Kelly Staley and other district officials, claiming that the policy violated her constitutional rights to direct the upbringing of her child.  In 2024, after the filing, the California Legislature enacted the SAFETY Act (AB 1955), which expressly prohibits school districts from adopting policies that require staff to disclose a student’s gender identity or sexual orientation to parents without the student’s consent.  The law was designed to affirm student agency and prevent forced “outing,” particularly where such disclosure could place students at risk of harm.

The District Court originally dismissed the case at the pleading stage, finding no violation of the parent’s constitutional rights.  However, the Ninth Circuit reversed, in part, holding that Regino had plausibly alleged a violation of her substantive due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment.  Specifically, the Court acknowledged that while “the right is not unbounded,” … “the fundamental right of parents to make decisions concerning the care, custody, and control of their children,” therefore a blanket policy of withholding information about a child’s gender identity could infringe on that right, at least in certain circumstances.  The court remanded the case back to District Court for further proceedings.

Importantly, the Court did not rule that the policy was unconstitutional, only that the case could proceed beyond the motion to dismiss stage.  The Ninth Circuit’s decision does not enjoin the district’s policy, but it opens the door to further litigation on the constitutional limits of school practices involving gender identity and parental notification. However, Regino suggests that, at least under federal constitutional law, there could be circumstances in which a blanket policy of non-disclosure of student information to parents could infringe on a parents’ fundamental rights to direct the upbringing of their children.  

At this time, school districts must continue to comply with the SAFETY Act and not disclose a student’s gender identity or sexual orientation to a parent without student consent. F3 will be monitoring the Regino case closely for future developments.