It’s going to cost California some $4.5 million to lose a legal fight over its agenda to “transition” children in the state’s schools secretly.
It was none other than the U.S. Supreme Court that closed down that plan.
And now a court order from U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez, of the Southern District in California, has granted a request from the Thomas More Society for $4.52 million in legal fees.
That law firm represented the two public school teachers in the Mirabelli v. Bonta case.
According to a report at the Center Square, the judge actually warned that “California has continued to challenge aspects of the ruling, including a recent motion seeking to modify the injunction.”
The report said, “The court detailed a pattern of what it called ‘litigation intransigence’ by state defendants, including repeated motions to dismiss after prior ones were denied and filing an appeal without waiting for a ruling. Benitez described the ongoing litigation as based on ‘the thinnest of arguments.’”
The case follows litigation that began in 2023 over California’s agenda to have public school staff members transition children in schools into the transgender lifestyle choice, and then conceal those actions from parents.
The lawsuit challenged guidance critics describe as “gender secrecy” policies, which allow school officials to withhold information from parents about a student’s request to change names, pronouns or other gender-related identifiers at school, the report said.
The ruling from the Supreme Court was 6-3 against a school policy because the justices found parents likely will succeed in their constitutional claim.
“Thomas More Society will continue to enforce the Mirabelli ruling nationwide, and any school district or state that tries to cut parents out of their children’s lives should expect the same result,” said Peter Breen, executive vice president at Thomas More Society.
WorldNetDaily previously reported the ruling was called a “watershed moment for parental rights.”
“The Supreme Court has told California and every state in the nation in no uncertain terms: you cannot secretly transition a child behind a parent’s back,” explained Paul Jonna, a lawyer at the Thomas More Society.
“The court’s landmark reaffirmation of substantive due process, its vindication of religious liberty, and its approval of class-wide relief together set a historic precedent that will dismantle secret gender transition policies across the country,” Jonna said.
The Supreme Court’s action was to affirm an injunction against the state’s gender secrecy agenda, which was intended by officials in the leftist state to require school staff hide any student’s “transgender identity” from parents.
The court decision was based on a precedent from a case filed on behalf of Catholic parents, and the result is that a state law barring parental notification cannot be applied.
Left standing was the ruling from Benitez, who said, “The attorney general on behalf of the state of California says plaintiffs’ lawsuit is ‘properly understood as seeking a federal constitutional exemption from the California constitutional right to privacy, as applied to gender identity in the school context.’ … But the attorney general gets it upside down. Plaintiffs do not ask the state to magnanimously permit a sort of federal constitutional exemption. What plaintiffs seek is to force the state to respect their enduring federal constitutional rights as citizens of the United States.”
Constitutional expert Jonathan Turley explained, of the ruling, “While it only restores the injunction during the pendency of the litigation below, it reflects a clear notion of the likelihood to prevail on the merits.”
The lawsuit at hand involved teachers who sued because they expected to be punished if they refused to lie about a student’s gender identity. Parents joined the action involving the Escondido Union School District’s agenda.
Supreme Court blows up scheme to secretly push transgenderism on kids in school
