Tag: parental rights

Supreme Court Backs Parental Rights Over School LGBTQ Books and Classes

In a landmark 6-3 decision on June 27, 2025, the Supreme Court ruled in Mahmoud v. Taylor that parents have a constitutional right to opt their children out of public-school lessons involving LGBTQ-themed storybooks on religious grounds.

Writing for the majority, Justice Samuel Alito held that Montgomery County, Maryland’s policy of requiring elementary students to participate in instruction featuring these books without allowing religious exemptions violated the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause.

Several of the titles at the center of Mahmoud v. Taylor have also appeared in similar lawsuits across the country, where parents, both Christian and Muslim, have sought to either remove the books entirely or at least retain the right to opt their children out.

The specific books that sparked the legal battle in Montgomery County included Uncle Bobby’s Wedding (kindergarten), about a girl adjusting to her uncle’s marriage to another man; Prince & Knight (first grade), a fairy tale romance between two men; and Born Ready (second grade), the story of a transgender child.

Other titles that have drawn objections include Love, Violet, about a girl nervous to give a valentine to another girl, and Pride Puppy, an alphabet book about a dog lost during a Pride parade.

Books challenged by parents elsewhere include Lawn Boy, Gender Queer: A Memoir, and All Boys Aren’t Blue, all of which feature explicit sexual content and gender identity themes.

Elementary and middle-grade books like King and King, Melissa (formerly George), and Julián Is a Mermaid have also faced legal and school board challenges.

Other contested titles include This Book Is Gay, ABC Pride, Heartstopper, Fun Home, It’s Perfectly Normal (a sex education book), Baby Be-Bop, The Drowning of Stephan Jones, and The Education of Harriet Hatfield.

Keep reading

Leftist Supreme Court Justices Want To Parent Your Kids In The Worst Way

After a flurry of recent Supreme Court decisions, parents still have the right to teach values to their own children. For now.

If the three minority, leftist justices — Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson — had their way, public schools, rogue doctors, and the internet would be parenting instead.  

In dissenting opinions on three key cases, these three life-long appointees revealed how little they care for children.   

In Free Speech Coalition, Inc. v. Paxton, they argued it is unconstitutional to keep kids safe from porn if it means adults have to pause when entering an internet smut site long enough to prove they are over 18 to leer at  “hardcore pornographic content and videos,” many of which depict “sexual violence, incest, physical aggression, sexual assault, non-consent, and teens,” the majority opinion notes.

According to Kagan, who wrote the minority opinion, “Obscene-for-children speech is constitutionally protected speech for adults.” She repeats this concept many times.

Kagan and her gals really believe it is more important to preserve adult access to videos depicting sexual crimes than it is to keep it where it belongs: far away from children. In truth, there should be no market for this marriage-damaging, mind-altering, addictive content at any age.

Some porn is made with real trafficking victims, sometimes minors.

For example, Michael Pratt, leader of the GirlsDoPorn sex trafficking ring, pleaded guilty in federal court this month to many sex trafficking counts, according to the Department of Justice, for using “force, fraud, and coercion to recruit hundreds of young women – most in their late teens – to appear in GirlsDoPorn videos.”

Kagan, Sotomayor, and Jackson want to assure adults don’t have to prove their age before viewing these crime victims, no matter the consequence it may have on children.   

In Skrmetti v. United States, the Supreme Court majority found the “Tennessee law prohibiting the surgical and chemical castration of minors does not violate the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause,” The Federalist’s Shawn Fleetwood reported last week.  

Sotomayor wrote a dissenting opinion that Kagan and Jackson joined in part and in full, respectively.

Keep reading

OMG: “Parents Don’t Need to Know That You’re Transitioning” – Nevada DHHS Official Admits to Hiding Castration Surgeries From Parents

The O’Keefe Media Group on Friday released part two of its undercover footage of Nevada DHHS Official Deshaun Mack admitting to ‘bending the rules’ to get Medicare to pay for transition surgeries for minors.

Deshaun Mack admitted he helps transition children and hide the castration surgeries from parents. He also said he uses a loophole to get Medicare to pay for the transition surgeries.

Per O’Keefe Media Group:

Deshaun Eli Mack, a Family Services Specialist with the Nevada DHHS, told an undercover OMG journalist that not only has he helped children transition, but he has done it “a few times, actually. Actually, a lot of times,” adding, “I don’t see as many as I would enjoy seeing.”

Mack described helping a biological male pursue so-called feminization surgery. “She had specifically asked me about feminization surgery,” he recalled, explaining the advice he gave: “I told her the best way to get it would be to make sure that your doctor says that it’s medically necessary. So that medicare pays for it.”

When asked about what happens if a child’s parents don’t approve of the transition or don’t know about it, Mack made it clear: “We do not actually tell anyone.” He elaborated further, stating, “I can’t even tell you that your child is receiving benefits. Because you’re not on that case.” According to Mack, “The parents don’t need to know that you’re transitioning. You can just go to the doctor.”

Even more disturbing, Mack openly admitted to abusing the state’s “runaway youth” provision to bypass parental consent. “At that point, I would just shoot them as a runaway youth,” he said.

He further explained the mechanics of how the system can be manipulated: “We can approve the benefits for the child by themselves. Or we can pull them off their parent’s case.” He added that this practice doesn’t alert other state agencies either: “I don’t even think in that circumstance we let our sister agency, DCFS, Division of Child Care and Family Services, I don’t even think we alert them at that point.”

“I can’t even tell you that your child is receiving benefits. Because you’re not on that case.” Mack told the OMG journalist. “The parents don’t need to know that you’re transitioning. You can just go to the doctor.”

Keep reading

Parents Demanding Justice Alliance Organization Issues Urgent Call to Congress for Action on DOJ Targeting of Parents

The Parents Demanding Justice Alliance has released a formal memo to members of Congress demanding swift accountability for the Department of Justice’s targeting of concerned school parents.

The memo calls for immediate investigation and full redress for parents who were unjustly surveilled, investigated, and maligned for expressing legitimate concerns at local school board meetings and schools. These actions, the Alliance asserts, constituted a severe abuse of federal power and a violation of First Amendment rights.

“The Parents Demanding Justice Alliance is composed of advocates around the nation, united in pressing for full accountability regarding the DOJ’s targeting of parents who expressed good-faith concerns at school board meetings and schools—a directive now under review by President Trump’s Weaponization Working Group,” explains Seak Smith, Founder of Mom Army & Dad Army.

The Alliance cites the February 5, 2025 memo from the Office of the Attorney General titled Restoring the Integrity and Credibility of the Department of Justice, which reaffirmed President Trump’s directive to reverse what he called the “unprecedented, third-world weaponization of prosecutorial power.”

Keep reading

Washington State Dems vote against informing parents about sexual assault of a child by a school employee

In a move that has sparked fierce backlash from Republican lawmakers and parental rights organizations, Washington Governor Bob Ferguson signed House Bill 1296 into law on Tuesday, effectively dismantling key provisions of Initiative 2081—a voter-backed parental rights initiative supported by over 454,000 Washingtonians.

HB 1296, sponsored and passed by the Democratic majority in the Legislature, revises the parental rights measure that was enacted with bipartisan support just one year ago. The original initiative outlined 15 rights for parents of public school students, including the right to be notified of academic, medical, safety, and law enforcement matters involving their children, and the right to access educational and medical records.

Critics say the new legislation guts the core of Initiative 2081. Among the most controversial changes:

  • Schools can delay parents from receiving information about their students and entirely removes access for parents receiving medical and mental health records. 
  • The bill removes the requirement to notify parents when their child receives medical services from government employees in schools. 
  • It allows government employees up to two days to notify parents that their child was the victim of a crime or sexual assault in school. 
  • The bill creates significant legal and bureaucratic hurdles for parents seeking to hold schools accountable when rights under I-2081 are violated.
  • The Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) is granted expanded authority to penalize school districts that fail to comply with its directives.

The bill passed along party lines, with every Republican legislator voting against it. Rep. Travis Couture (R-Allyn), a vocal opponent of HB 1296, denounced the measure as a “slap in the face to democracy” and criticized Democrats for overturning a measure they had previously supported. “We have seen a stunning amount of sexual misconduct and sexual assaults by educators in our schools just in the last year,” Couture said. He proposed an amendment that would have required immediate parental notification if a student was sexually abused by a school employee—an amendment Democrats voted down.

Let’s Go Washington, the citizen-led group that spearheaded the original initiative, issued a sharp rebuke following the bill’s signing. Founder Brian Heywood said in a statement to The Ari Hoffman Show on Talk Radio 570 KVI, “This is a direct assault on parents and a damnation of Governor Ferguson’s claim to be a moderate for Washingtonians.” Heywood emphasized the group’s commitment to repealing the new law, stating, “We will do everything in our power to reverse this gutting of the Parental Rights Bill.”

The legislation has also drawn national attention. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) called the changes “utterly insane,” while former President Donald Trump weighed in on Truth Social, claiming, “Washington State Democrats voted not to inform parents if a child is sexually abused by a school employee.” Billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk also shared the news, amplifying conservative criticism.

Keep reading

Colorado Could Be The Parental Rights Canary In The Coal Mine

Some may look at the pending Colorado legislation destroying parental rights and wrongly see the last gasps of a dying woke regime.   

The dystopian state house bill, HB 25-1312 or better known as the “Kelly Loving Act,” allows the Colorado government to remove a child from her parents if parents refuse to go along with her gender dysphoria and self-styled new identity. It represents the most totalitarian legal destruction of parental rights in American history. 

The bill passed the Colorado House and Senate. To understand why this destructive legislation might become Colorado law, we need to look closer at the cultural understructure. 

The most politically powerful defenders of children are married, biological parents. In 1970, married households with kids under age 18 made up 40 percent of all American households. Today, that number stands at just 17.8 percent of all households. 

Colorado sits on the front edge of the demographic cliff with K-12 schools already starting to shutter. According to the US Census, married households with kids in the state are just 81 percent of the national average at 14.4 percent of all households.   

So, this evil legislation makes some political sense. The less married parents with kids in any electorate district, the more vulnerable parents and kids are to the onslaught of state power. 

And given current trends in marriage and fertility rates – our future politics may look a lot more like Colorado’s politics than anyone realizes. This legal threat to parental rights will spread. 

Here’s what we know both from the data and common sense.  

A man not married to the mother of his child is less present in the day-to-day life of his child. Nearly all unmarried dads are nonresident dads who see their child less than once a week within two years of becoming a nonresident dad. A large portion of these men see their child only monthly or even less. These children don’t just lack the vital day-to-day influence that only a loving, present father can provide, they lose a powerful advocate and protector – particularly in politics.   

Keep reading

Virginia passes law to limit time teens spend on social media to one hour a day

Virginia teens under 16 will soon face limits on their social media usage after Governor Glenn Youngkin signed new legislation into law.

The law requires social media companies to set default time limits of one hour per day for users under 16 years old, with parents having the ability to adjust that time up or down.

“It’s a good first start, and it’s a good way for parents to be able to have better control over how much social media their kids are on,” said Sen. Schuyler VanValkenburg (D – Henrico), who co-sponsored the legislation.

VanValkenburg, who teaches in Henrico County schools, has witnessed the impact of excessive social media use firsthand.

“You see how much it hinders their ability to do well in school, and you see how much it hinders their socialization with their friends,” VanValkenburg said.

Keep reading

Affirm Your Kid’s Chosen Gender Or Lose Custody? Colorado’s Chilling New Bill

The Colorado state legislature is considering a bill that would radically chill parents’ speech. Dubbed the “Kelly Loving Act,” the bill, if signed into law, would empower judges to consider “deadnaming” and “misgendering” your child to be types of “coercive control” when they’re making custody decisions. In simple terms: if your child gender transitions and you don’t affirm their new gender identity, then a judge could consider your non-affirmation to be a form of abuse and use it as justification to deny you custody of your child.

This is a deeply chilling bill. The bill’s sponsors frame it as a way to show support for transgender people, but this bill goes way too far in stripping away parents’ rights.

Being a good and loving parent means telling your child “no.” Every parent has had these conversations.

“No, you can’t have M&Ms for dinner; eat your broccoli.”

“No, you can’t stay up until midnight. Your bedtime is ten.”

“No, you can’t hang out with Chad who’s always high; find some friends who will have a better influence on you.”

But when it comes to gender transitioning, saying “no” could be dangerous. If your son decides to socially transition and begins calling himself a girl, and you don’t unconditionally affirm that decision, then you could risk losing him if you’re ever in a child custody battle.

Some advocates of gender transitioning say that socially transitioning is harmless. After all, what does it matter if your son starts to use female pronouns and wear dresses? The problem is that socially transitioning puts many children on a conveyor belt to medically transitioning. According to a 2022 study on the topic, a stunning 97.5 percent of young people who socially transitioned continued to identify as either trans or nonbinary several years later. Nearly 60 percent went on to medically transition via either puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones.

Keep reading

Mothers Are Losing Custody Over Sketchy Drug Tests

A Georgia mother claims that she lost custody of her newborn daughter due to faulty drug tests from a lab with a documented history of inaccurate results. When a drug court and her OB-GYN ran tests on Kristen Clark-Hassell, her results were clean. But the tests from Georgia’s Division of Family and Children Services (DFCS) came back positive, and so the government took her youngest child.

“They literally took her off my breast in the hallway with her screaming after the court hearing,” Clark-Hassell told the Savannah-based outlet The Current. “For her to just be ripped like that just cut a hole in our hearts.”

In a 2021 whistleblower complaint, a former lab director for Avertest—the company that processed Clark-Hassell’s drug tests—claimed that as many as 30 percent of the lab’s test results were inaccurate. She further alleged that “meeting deadlines for test results is more important to Avertest than accuracy” and that the company manipulated data and set arbitrary detection cutoffs, increasing false positives. Avertest settled the Justice Department lawsuit relating to these claims in 2024, paying a $1.3 million settlement.

Clark-Hassell’s legal battle began with a DFCS-ordered Avertest drug screening in 2020. According to documents obtained by The Current, that test was taken on August 5, and it came back positive. Then a test from her OB-GYN taken on August 11 was negative. In September, a court-ordered drug test came back negative, but the DFCS ordered another round of testing in October. That time, her urine sample came back clean, but her hair follicle test was positive—raising serious concerns about the reliability of the results. While it’s still possible that the sporadic positives Clark-Hassell experienced were the result of drug use, this exact circumstance is why accurate testing matters when deciding whether or not to take the drastic step of removing children from their parents’ care.

Clark-Hassell’s case is not unique. Last year, The Marshall Project published two investigations revealing that CPS removed children based on unreliable drug tests. Some mothers tested positive after consuming over-the-counter drugs or poppy seeds. In other cases, hospitals reported women for testing positive for drugs that were given to them during labor.

Keep reading

Colorado Democrats Push Trans Bill That Was Too Radical For California

Colorado’s “Kelly Loving Act” (HB 1312) is truly one of the most radical, extreme, and anti-family bills ever proposed in our nation’s 249-year history. And that might be an understatement.

HB 1312 purports to provide “legal protections for transgender individuals.” In reality, it facilitates the state ripping children away from their parents if they refuse to go along with their child’s desire to “socially” or “medically transition.”

Indeed, HB 1312’s Section 2 prohibits parents from “misgendering” or “deadnaming” their child from the moment they choose to adopt a new identity. The bill likens such horrible practices — such as parents calling their child by the name they lovingly chose for them — to “abuse” equivalent to “threatening, humiliating, or [other] intimidating actions, including assaults or other abuse.”

If parents refuse, Colorado’s courts could step in and remove the child from their parent’s custody.

The legislation’s Sections 8 and 9 also adds “deadnaming” and “misgendering” to the state’s Anti-Discrimination Act, the same law that was used by the radical Colorado Civil Rights Commission to go after Christian cake artist Jack Phillips. Such a provision would censor the speech of businesses and employees across the state, forcing them to utter falsehoods they know to be untrue — or else.

In addition, the proposed bill’s Section 4, 5, and 6 would force schools to bend the knee to gender ideology, mandating school employees use student’s “preferred pronouns” and prohibiting any sex-based dress codes.

Keep reading