MARC WHEAT: Will the Supreme Court Uphold Parental Rights?

By Marc Wheat |

This year marks the centennial of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Pierce v. Society of Sisters, which affirmed parents’ rights to make educational decisions for their children. The Court declared that “the child is not the mere creature of the state,” a principle that resonates even today as families look to the judicial system for protection against overreaching government policies.

Currently, a troubling trend is emerging in some U.S. courts where parents face obstacles in seeking justice. In a notable case from Wisconsin, Parents Protecting Our Children v. Eau Claire Area School District, parents contested a policy that required school officials to conceal a child’s “social gender transition” from them. The school’s stance emphasized that “parents are not entitled to know their kids’ identities” and suggested that such knowledge must be “earned.”

In a surprising turn, the Seventh Circuit ruled that the alleged harm to the parents was merely speculative. This ruling imposes a troubling precedent: parents must endure a situation where they are oblivious to critical aspects of their child’s school life—such as transitioning—before they are allowed to file a lawsuit.

The Supreme Court declined to review this ruling. Justice Samuel Alito, joined by Justice Clarence Thomas, expressed concern in a dissent, arguing that the harm to parents is indeed tangible, while warning against courts that avoid critical constitutional debates by manipulating the doctrine of Article III standing.

This case is not an outlier. Similar judgements have emerged from other circuits, like the Fourth Circuit in John and Jane Parents 1 v. Montgomery County Board of Education and a district court ruling in Ohio in Doe v. Pine-Richland School District. Such decisions jeopardize parents’ rights to upbringing and the necessity to shield their children from ideological influences in the education system.

In response, Advancing American Freedom is urging the Supreme Court to review a case involving Blake Warner. This case challenges an Eleventh Circuit regulation that necessitates parents to hire legal representation to advocate for their children’s interests in court. While Warner’s matter does not pertain directly to gender ideology, his fight highlights a crucial issue: many parents cannot afford legal counsel, risking their ability to protect their children’s rights.

Additionally, on January 29, President Trump announced an executive order that aimed to withdraw federal funding from schools facilitating “social transitions” for minors. He instructed the attorney general to collaborate with state officials to ensure compliance, a move that may encounter substantial opposition. It underscores the need for continual vigilance among parents and a call for the courts to acknowledge their claims seriously. The Supreme Court has an opportunity to reinforce parental rights by addressing Warner’s challenge and potentially dismantling the legal requirements that hinder parents’ pursuit of justice.

Originally published by the Daily Caller News Foundation.

Marc Wheat is a contributor to The Daily Caller News Foundation and serves as General Counsel for Advancing American Freedom.