“That does not mean their objections are invalid,” the opinion continued. “In fact, they may be quite persuasive. But, by failing to allege any injury to themselves, the parents’ opposition to the Parental Preclusion Policy reflects a policy disagreement. And policy disagreements should be addressed to elected policymakers at the ballot box, not to unelected judges in the courthouse.”
The policy states that the principal or a designee will work with the transgender student to develop a plan to ensure the student has equal access and opportunity to participate in programs and activities without any gender-based discrimination. The policy states that the school should ascertain the support from home before contacting parents and can withhold information from the parents if the student does not have support from home or believes he or she will not receive support.
Judge Paul V. Niemeyer dissented from the majority opinion and argued that the parents had standing because their children are still subject to the policy in question.
“[The board] preempts the issue to the exclusion of parents with the adoption of its [guidelines], which invite all students in the Montgomery County public schools to engage in gender transition plans with school principals without the knowledge and consent of their parents,” Niemeyer said.
Frederick Claybrook, an attorney representing the three unnamed parents who filed the lawsuit, said they are considering next steps, according to the Washington Post.
The attorney said the parents agreed with the dissenting judge’s opinion that the policy would allow schools to keep secrets from parents about their children, violating parents’ rights, the Post reported.