California schools forced to out transgender students

By: Paul Goldberg, Senior Editor | JRL CHARTS – LGBT Politics

SAN DIEGO, CA — (December 26, 2025) — A sweeping federal court ruling has sent shockwaves through LGBTQ communities nationwide after a conservative U.S. district judge ordered California schools to allow — and in some cases require — teachers to disclose a student’s transgender identity to their parents, dismantling long-standing protections designed to keep vulnerable youth safe.

Related LGBT Politics Coverage Links on JRL CHARTS:

• Get the Latest in LGBT Politics USA Exclusively on JRL CHARTS

• Where LGBTQ Texans Can Find Safety, Support, and Advocacy Resources

• New Jersey LGBTQ Group Under Fire After Arrest of Executive Directors

• Palm Desert Mayor Sparks Backlash After Move to Strip Pride Month Recognition

The ruling, issued by U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez of San Diego, bars school districts from honoring a student’s chosen name or pronouns without parental approval and blocks schools from shielding students who may fear rejection, abuse, or forced “conversion” efforts at home.

Benitez framed the decision as a parental-rights issue — but LGBTQ advocates say it is a textbook political attack on trans youth, one that was almost immediately met with plans for an emergency appeal.

JRL CHARTS supports the state’s position and the prior rulings protecting transgender students — and we fully expect this decision to be fast-tracked for appeal. This is the standard playbook of anti-LGBTQ conservatives: lose in court, then run to a right-wing judge to try to reverse common-sense protections.

What the Judge Ordered

Under Benitez’s ruling, California schools are now prohibited from:

Using a student’s chosen name or pronouns without parental consent
Withholding information about a student’s gender identity from parents
Protecting a student who may not feel safe coming out at home

The judge even went so far as to allow school employees to override a student’s expressed identity if a parent objects — forcing educators into the role of informants rather than protectors.

This effectively nullifies California’s AB1955, a state law signed by Governor Gavin Newsom that allows teachers discretion to protect LGBTQ students from being involuntarily outed — a safeguard supported by mental-health professionals and child-welfare advocates nationwide.

A Direct Clash Between Federal Judges

The ruling creates a direct conflict between two federal judges.

Earlier, U.S. District Judge John Mendez upheld California’s protections for transgender students, writing that the state has a legitimate interest in shielding LGBTQ youth from hostile or dangerous reactions at home.

But Benitez — a longtime conservative appointee — rejected that view and sided with parents demanding disclosure, despite overwhelming evidence that forced outing dramatically increases suicide risk among trans and questioning teens.

State Leaders Move Toward Emergency Appeal

California Attorney General Rob Bonta immediately requested that Benitez’s order be paused while the state appeals to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, warning that the ruling puts children at serious risk.

“We are committed to ensuring school environments where transgender students can exist safely and authentically,” a spokesperson said, while acknowledging the essential role families play — but not at the expense of a child’s safety.

The Legislature’s LGBTQ Caucus went further, calling the ruling “retaliatory politics” designed to impose forced-outing policies that will harm students’ mental health and academic success.

A Pattern of Judicial Activism

Benitez’s decision comes amid growing concern over activist judges targeting LGBTQ protections — especially as the U.S. Supreme Court, now dominated by conservatives, has already upheld restrictions on transgender health care and allowed bans on trans military service.

In fact, Benitez himself was reprimanded last year by a federal judicial panel for mistreating a child in his courtroom — a rare rebuke that barred him from hearing criminal cases for three years.

Yet in this ruling, he went further still, suggesting that being transgender may be a mental condition requiring parental intervention — a position widely rejected by every major medical association in the United States.

Why This Will Almost Certainly Be Overturned

Legal experts say Benitez’s order is vulnerable because:

It conflicts with established First Amendment protections
It contradicts child-welfare law
It directly clashes with prior federal rulings
It places schools in legal jeopardy

And most importantly, it ignores the overwhelming evidence that forced outing increases harm to LGBTQ youth.

What Comes Next

The case is now headed to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, where California has a strong track record of defending LGBTQ rights. If necessary, it may reach the U.S. Supreme Court — but advocates are confident that this ruling will not stand.

JRL CHARTS will continue tracking this case as it moves through the courts — because protecting LGBTQ youth is not political. It is a matter of survival.

For continuing coverage of LGBTQ rights, legal battles, and political power plays, follow JRL CHARTS — the independent voice of LGBT Politics.

Media Partners: For licensing inquiries, media usage rights, or republication requests, please visit our Contact Us page. All content © JRL CHARTS Media Network. Unauthorized use is strictly prohibited.