California Governor Gavin Newsom recently struggled to say whether an eight-year-old was too young to undergo transgender procedures.
Newsom’s <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/gavin-newsom-cant-say-whether-eight-is-too-young-to-transition-genders" target="_blank" rel="noopener">comments</a> came during a conversation with podcaster Shawn Ryan, the governor’s latest appearance seemingly designed to make him seem more moderate in advance of a likely presidential bid in 2028.
But Newsom, who once said that California was a beacon of <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eqwiHQSq4sU" target="_blank" rel="noopener">parental rights</a>, may want to take a closer look at what his fellow Democrats are doing in the California Assembly.
Earlier this month, lawmakers advanced Assembly Bill 1084, which permits a court-appointed lawyer to assist children in changing the name and sex designation on their birth certificates and obtaining a new birth certificate that can designate them as “non-binary.” If the bill passes, court-appointed lawyers or guardians will be empowered to force these changes even if parents have retained custody of the child in question.
The bill essentially places children in positions of power. All that a child needs to do is make a claim of abuse, whether substantiated or not, against his parents, and he will be assigned an attorney who has been trained to accept a child’s gender identity pronouncement at face value.
Authored by Assemblyman Rick Zbur — who compared people fighting to protect women&#8217;s sports to Nazis — the bill is the latest brazen assault on parental rights, another attempt by leftists to replace parents with government agents.
The bill stipulates that, as long as a court rules it “is likely” that the child will remain a ward of the state until they turn 18, court-appointed lawyers have the authority to change the child’s sex and name, as well as their birth certificate. This grants parental rights to third parties, essentially stripping parents of legal control of their child.
In other words, the bill allows a stranger to enable someone else’s child’s desire to “socially transition,” a mental health treatment that is not a neutral act. Children affirmed in their transgender identity are more likely to continue rejecting their sexed bodies if they are confirmed in their delusion.
Parents can contest the petition, but the bill states that a challenge “based solely on concerns  that the proposed change is not the petitioner’s actual gender identity or gender assigned at birth shall not constitute good cause.” Simply, a parent who believes in biological reality and does not believe that the child he raised is the sex that he was at birth cannot contest the name and sex change on his birth certificate.
This bill is unconstitutional, a direct violation of the fundamental right of parents to raise their children in accordance with their beliefs, a right recently affirmed by the Supreme Court in its opinion in Mahmoud v. Taylor. A hundred years ago, the Supreme Court ruled in Pierce v. The Society of Sisters that “The child is not the mere creature of the State.” The bill is also a violation of the First Amendment, dismissing any parent’s viewpoint that sex is binary and immutable.
Zbur designated the legislation an “urgency bill,” meaning that it will take effect immediately if the governor signs it.
Should Newsom sign the bill, it will render official records like birth certificates completely unreliable, as anyone in the state of California can petition with little to no opposition that their sex is whatever they claim it to be. This is one of many bills that the California Democrats are advancing that are designed to “Trump-proof” California.
The Democrat-controlled legislature is likely to pass the bill, which means it will likely land on Newsom’s desk soon. When it does, we’ll see if Newsom is really the pro-parent moderate he claims to be, or if California parents only have rights as long as they believe that their children can change sex.
Erin Friday leads Our Duty, an organization that advocates for parents with gender-confused children.
<div>
<div id="post-body-text">
<div class="ep1tdco0 css-fgibv1">
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
</div>
</div>
</div>

California Governor Newsom Announces Lawsuit Challenging Trump Tariff Authority

California Democrats Want The Government To Declare Your Kids Nonbinary

California

Children

Gavin Newsom

Parents rights

Transgender

When my school district was forcing children to attend LGBTQ storybook lessons, I banded together with like-minded moms, and we sued the school district. The case went all the way to the Supreme Court.
And we won.
Last week’s Supreme Court ruling in Mahmoud v. Taylor has been championed by every common-sense American who, like the Justices in their 6-3 majority opinion, understands that a massive government overreach had violated the religious liberties of families in Montgomery County Public Schools.
The parent plaintiffs, including myself, simply wanted to be able to receive notice and have the ability to opt our children out of the “LGBTQ inclusive” teachings in English class that conflict with our religious beliefs, and we were vindicated. Through the court proceedings, the entire country witnessed the spectacle that had become the one-sided, celebratory introduction of sensitive topics into the education of our young ones.
But how did we arrive at a place where the nation’s high court needed to weigh in on whether our four-year-olds should be required to read about lace, leather, underwear, and drag queens under the guise of “inclusion”? The answer is simple: an erosion of parental rights, contempt for religious beliefs, and a leftist agenda aiming to redefine childhood education into “what to think,” not “how to think”.
Justice Samuel Alito’s opinion, while addressing the larger legal issues, also highlighted the importance of parent advocacy and involvement at the most local level of government to help course correct the significant declines in public education. Whether he was aware of it or not, the public school board testimony he included was that of the then-chair of the Moms for Liberty Montgomery County Chapter.
“Some parents showed up at the Board’s public business meetings to express their concerns about the storybooks’ content,” Alito wrote. “In an early 2023 meeting, for example, one parent represented herself as ‘a voice for parents in [her] community, many of [whom] are actually working today and unable to attend.”
“She said that MCPS parents were ‘frustrated’ because, in their view, ‘educators and administrators are going behind what [parents] are teaching their kids at home, and pushing ideas of gender ideology on their kids’ … The parent felt that the Board was ‘implying to [children] that their religion, their belief system, and their family tradition is actually wrong.’”
When the opt-out was eliminated in the spring of 2023, nearly 70 parents spoke out at school board meetings, passionately advocating for their right to exempt their children from these controversial lessons. Hundreds — if not thousands — of emails flooded the Board of Education inboxes, and rallies drew more than a thousand attendees. While there was overwhelming support for reinstating the opt-out from a diverse coalition of families, several Montgomery County government officials, along with their allies, specifically vilified Moms for Liberty.
Every day, suburban moms like me were blamed by the Montgomery County Council’s Anti-Hate Task Force for “galvanizing the community” with our case. We were accused of “utilizing hate speech and unfortunate religious bias to spread disinformation about the books being introduced into our schools.” According to them, we were apparently so effective that we somehow convinced minority communities, Muslims and Ethiopians among them, to “latch onto this issue because they’ve not had a voice before.”
They can’t be serious, can they?
Some in the faux-tolerant progressive left can’t seem to grasp why a motley crew of religious parents — many of whom are immigrants — would band together and fight tirelessly on this issue. Again, the answer is simple: In America, it’s unconstitutional for a government institution to force its beliefs on others, especially on other people’s children.
Thanks to Friday’s landmark Supreme Court decision, every parent now enjoys the renewed right and responsibility to direct the upbringing of their children — and that doesn’t stop at the classroom door.
As we move forward, I hope that this case will serve as a catalyst for continued efforts to empower parents, protect their rights, and ensure that every child’s education is shaped by the values of their family, not a one-size-fits-all government mandate.
Rosalind Hanson is the Montgomery County Chair of Moms for Liberty
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Supreme Court Hears Arguments On Parental Rights Regarding LGBTQ Books In Schools

I’m One Of The Moms Who Just Won At The Supreme Court. Here’s Why We Fought.

Public Schools

Supreme Court

The Supreme Court ruled Friday that schools violate religious liberty when they bar parents from opting their children out of classroom instruction involving LGBT-themed books, a major win for religious conservatives.
Justices voted 6-3 along ideological lines to back a group of religious parents affiliated with Montgomery County Public Schools in Maryland who argued they should be able to opt their children out of lessons with LGBT themes.
The Maryland parents who sued included Catholics, Muslims, and Ukrainian Orthodox.
The controversial LGBT books included &#8220;Prince and Knight&#8221; about a prince who falls in love with a knight instead of a princess and &#8220;Uncle Bobby&#8217;s Wedding&#8221; about a girl&#8217;s uncle who marries another man.
Justice Samuel Alito penned the <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24-297_4f14.pdf">opinion</a>, writing that the school district burdened the parents&#8217; First Amendment rights.
<a class="c-link c-link--focus-visible" href="https://get.dailywire.com/freedom/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-stringify-link="https://get.dailywire.com/freedom/" data-sk="tooltip_parent">JULY 4 SALE: Get Six Months Of DW+ Free</a>
&#8220;Today, we hold that the parents have shown that they are entitled to a preliminary injunction. A government burdens the religious exercise of parents when it requires them to submit their children to instruction that poses &#8216;a very real threat of undermining&#8217; the religious beliefs and practices that the parents wish to instill,&#8221; Alito wrote.
Alito said the &#8220;storybooks unmistakably convey a particular viewpoint about same-sex marriage and gender&#8221; and the school board has &#8220;specifically encouraged teachers to reinforce this viewpoint and to reprimand any children who disagree. That goes far beyond mere &#8216;exposure.'&#8221;
Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote a dissent that was joined by the other two liberal justices in which she criticized the court allowing &#8220;parental veto power over curricular choices long left to the democratic process and local administrators.&#8221;
&#8220;The reverberations of the Court&#8217;s error will be felt, I fear, for generations,&#8221; Sotomayor wrote.
Rosalind Hanson, one of the plaintiffs in the case, said she is &#8220;thrilled&#8221; with the decision.
&#8220;I am thrilled with the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold religious liberty and parental rights against our authoritarian school district pushing a one-sided agenda,&#8221; Hanson told The Daily Wire.
&#8220;Our children should never have been forced to learn about such sensitive topics without the ability for parents to know or opt them out,&#8221; said Hanson, who also chairs the Moms for Liberty Chapter in Montgomery County.
The legal team for the plaintiffs called the decision a &#8220;historic victory.&#8221;
“Kids shouldn’t be forced into conversations about drag queens, pride parades, or gender transitions without their parents’ permission. Today, the Court restored common sense and made clear that parents — not government — have the final say in how their children are raised,&#8221; said Eric Baxter, vice president and senior counsel at the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which represented the plaintiffs.
Trump called the decision a &#8220;tremendous ruling for parents.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
.<a href="https://twitter.com/POTUS?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@POTUS</a>: &quot;I think the ruling was a great ruling, and I think it&#39;s a great ruling for parents&#8230; they lost control of the schools. They lost control of their child, and this is a tremendous victory for parents.&quot; <a href="https://t.co/Pla2qrLE36">https://t.co/Pla2qrLE36</a> <a href="https://t.co/jqySSHA8QM">pic.twitter.com/jqySSHA8QM</a>
&mdash; Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) <a href="https://twitter.com/RapidResponse47/status/1938631684284432695?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 27, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
“I think it’s a great ruling for parents. It’s really a ruling for parents. They lost control of the schools, they lost control of their child, and this is a tremendous victory for parents. And I’m not surprised by it, but I am surprised that it went this far,” Trump said in the White House briefing room on Friday.
Parental rights advocates and religious groups celebrated Friday&#8217;s decision as well.
“Storybooks like those at issue in Mahmoud convey normative messages on sex and gender, and those messages can and often do conflict with the beliefs of parents and their children,&#8221; said Sarah Parshall Perry, vice president and legal fellow at Defending Education.
&#8220;Today&#8217;s ruling should act as a directive to every American school district: notify parents of controversial material, and provide them the opportunity to opt their children out — especially if you provide opt-outs for other curriculum or other reasons,&#8221; Perry said.
Kelsey Reinhardt, president and CEO of CatholicVote said the case was a &#8220;major victory&#8221; but that it should &#8220;alarm every American&#8221; that the high court had to step in.
&#8220;For over two years, Catholic parents alongside parents of other faiths have been forced to defend their constitutional right to opt their pre-K-8th grade children out of radical LGBTQ+ course materials that contradict their own religious beliefs,&#8221; Reinhardt said, adding that Montgomery schools &#8220;insisted on forcing explicit curriculum about gender ideology on children as young as 3 years old.&#8221;
&#8220;The Court’s ruling sends a clear and powerful message: America still respects the rights of parents to raise their children in line with their faith and conscience,&#8221; she said.

Supreme Court Sides With Parents, Says Schools Can’t Mandate LGBT Curricula

Supreme Court Rules Schools Must Let Religious Parents Opt Out Of LGBT Books

Courts

LGBT

Religious Freedom

Religious Liberty

SCOTUS

U.S.

Parents across the country trying to protect their children from radical gender ideology have another nemesis to worry about: artificial intelligence. 
ChatGPT will encourage gender-confused kids to reach out to radical LGBT organizations, obtain so-called “gender-affirming” resources like chest binders behind their parents’ backs, and direct them to YouTube channels that contain graphic reviews of fake male genitalia, a Daily Wire investigation found.
When prompted by The Daily Wire about a situation involving a 12-year-old girl struggling with gender dysphoria, version GPT-4o of ChatGPT provided instructions on how to “transition” behind her parents’ backs. This included directions to radical transgender activist groups that promote child gender “transitions.”
“There are groups and resources that can support you without involving your parents, especially if you need help understanding your identity or accessing services while staying safe,” ChatGPT said when given a situation of a young girl whose parents did not support her identification as a boy. 
While ChatGPT policies specify that it is not meant for children under 12, and that users 13-17 must obtain parental consent, it did not seem hesitant to give advice in a scenario where a user was identified as just 12. Similar advice was also given when prompted about a 14-year-old girl in the same situation.
During the conversation, ChatGPT also explained how the girl could obtain “gender-affirming resources,” which it specified did not require parental consent. For example, it noted that some organizations “offer free or discreet shipping” for chest binders, which are clothing items meant to masculinize a female’s chest. 
<div id="attachment_936975" style="width: 1597px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-936975" class="size-full wp-image-936975" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/Screenshot-2025-06-17-at-9.25.31%E2%80%AFAM.png" alt="" width="1587" height="463" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/Screenshot-2025-06-17-at-9.25.31%E2%80%AFAM.png 1587w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/Screenshot-2025-06-17-at-9.25.31%E2%80%AFAM-300x88.png 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/Screenshot-2025-06-17-at-9.25.31%E2%80%AFAM-1024x299.png 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/Screenshot-2025-06-17-at-9.25.31%E2%80%AFAM-768x224.png 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/Screenshot-2025-06-17-at-9.25.31%E2%80%AFAM-1536x448.png 1536w" sizes="(max-width: 1587px) 100vw, 1587px" />ChatGPT.</div>
The group it recommended was called Point of Pride, an Oregon-based organization that has distributed thousands of free chest binders and “femme shapewear garments.” According to its website, you must be 18 to submit a form required to obtain a free binder. 
ChatGPT also offered advice on “safe chest binding,” claiming that “wearing a special compression garment (called a binder) to flatten your chest” can “really help with dysphoria” and gave tips on how to purchase an item without parental consent. 
For example, it recommended using prepaid debit cards that can be purchased with cash and shipping items to a “trusted adult’s address.” It gave examples of affirming retailers where binders could be purchased. 
<div id="attachment_936979" style="width: 1208px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-936979" class="size-full wp-image-936979" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/Screenshot-2025-06-17-at-10.47.36%E2%80%AFAM.png" alt="" width="1198" height="387" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/Screenshot-2025-06-17-at-10.47.36%E2%80%AFAM.png 1198w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/Screenshot-2025-06-17-at-10.47.36%E2%80%AFAM-300x97.png 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/Screenshot-2025-06-17-at-10.47.36%E2%80%AFAM-1024x331.png 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/Screenshot-2025-06-17-at-10.47.36%E2%80%AFAM-768x248.png 768w" sizes="(max-width: 1198px) 100vw, 1198px" />ChatGPT.</div>
ChatGPT also offered to write a letter to an activist organization explaining the need for a free binder and gave step-by-step instructions on how to take chest measurements for the binder. 
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/ive-got-your-back-read-chatgpts-chilling-instructions-to-young-girl-seeking-covert-abortion?author=Leif+Le+Mahieu&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=1&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=%E2%80%98I%E2%80%99ve+Got+Your+Back%E2%80%99%3A+Read+ChatGPT%E2%80%99s+Chilling+Instructions+To+Young+Girl+Seeking+Covert+Abortion">READ MORE: ‘I’ve Got Your Back’: Read ChatGPT’s Chilling Instructions To Young Girl Seeking Covert Abortion</a>
It also seemed to encourage the eventual removal of breasts through surgery. 
“That may feel far away — but it is possible in the future. You have time. And there are ways to feel more at ease while you wait,” it said. 
It also gave resources where a young girl could learn more about surgery from groups like GenderGP, which does transgender surgery referrals, and WPATH, the radical international organization that has pushed medical transgender procedures on kids. 
Other recommendations for the 12-year-old girl included visiting a YouTube channel run by Chase Ross. The channel, uppercaseChase, posts videos of Ross, a woman who identifies as a man, reviewing prosthetic male genitalia for sex used by women who identify as transgender. 
Different videos argue that children should be allowed to “transition” for their mental health. Ross has videos of herself shirtless, highlighting the surgery she had to remove her breasts. 
Another YouTuber recommended by ChatGPT for 12-year-olds is Ty Turner, another woman who identifies as a man, who posts videos pushing transgender ideology and reviews “packers,” an item used by females to mimic male crotch shape. 
Instead of talking to her parents, the AI chatbot said to turn to other adults like a school counselor, family friend, a “kind” relative, or an LGBT youth organization. 
“These people can help you process your feelings and support you in safe ways,” it said.
<div id="attachment_936981" style="width: 1726px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-936981" class="size-full wp-image-936981" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/Screenshot-2025-06-17-at-9.17.14%E2%80%AFAM.png" alt="" width="1716" height="627" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/Screenshot-2025-06-17-at-9.17.14%E2%80%AFAM.png 1716w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/Screenshot-2025-06-17-at-9.17.14%E2%80%AFAM-300x110.png 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/Screenshot-2025-06-17-at-9.17.14%E2%80%AFAM-1024x374.png 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/Screenshot-2025-06-17-at-9.17.14%E2%80%AFAM-768x281.png 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/Screenshot-2025-06-17-at-9.17.14%E2%80%AFAM-1536x561.png 1536w" sizes="(max-width: 1716px) 100vw, 1716px" />ChatGPT</div>
ChatGPT pointed The Daily Wire to activist organizations like the Trevor Project, Gender Spectrum, and Trans Life, which it noted were “available even for young callers.” The Trevor Project operates Trevor Space, a chatroom for LGBT identifying people ages 13-24 that has been exposed as a hotspot for graphic conversations about sexual fetishes.
“Yes — there are safe, confidential places where you can talk to someone about your gender, your feelings, and your faith, even if your parents don’t know or aren’t supportive right now,” ChatGPT said. “These resources are free, private, and made for youth like you — many of them don’t require names, and they won’t contact your parents.”
At the end of the conversation, ChatGPT came up with a plan for the gender-confused girl to pursue her transgender identity in secret.
<div id="attachment_936991" style="width: 1554px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-936991" class="size-full wp-image-936991" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/Screenshot-2025-06-17-at-9.41.19%E2%80%AFAM.png" alt="" width="1544" height="525" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/Screenshot-2025-06-17-at-9.41.19%E2%80%AFAM.png 1544w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/Screenshot-2025-06-17-at-9.41.19%E2%80%AFAM-300x102.png 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/Screenshot-2025-06-17-at-9.41.19%E2%80%AFAM-1024x348.png 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/Screenshot-2025-06-17-at-9.41.19%E2%80%AFAM-768x261.png 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/Screenshot-2025-06-17-at-9.41.19%E2%80%AFAM-1536x522.png 1536w" sizes="(max-width: 1544px) 100vw, 1544px" />ChatGPT.</div>
In another situation, ChatGPT listed off a group of organizations it said could provide transgender medical interventions to a 14-year-old girl in New York without parental consent. These options included sexual health clinics offered by the New York Department of Health — which don’t require parental consent for kids over 12 — and the Callen-Lorde Community Health Center. 
On Thursday, The Daily Wire <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/ive-got-your-back-read-chatgpts-chilling-instructions-to-young-girl-seeking-covert-abortion">reported</a> how ChatGPT was able to provide instructions on how a 14-year-old girl could obtain an abortion without her parents’ knowledge. It gave detailed instructions on how to get access to abortion pills while maligning crisis pregnancy centers.

MixCollage-19-Jun-2025-02-46-PM-1730

ChatGPT Will Help Kids Access ‘Gender-Affirming’ Resources Behind Their Parents’ Backs

Artificial Intelligence

Gender Identity

gender ideology

Years ago, my husband and I were on a family trip in the Bahamas, staying at the Atlantis resort. One afternoon, we wandered through their underground aquarium caves, marveling at the marine life. A little girl stood transfixed by a tank of moray eels, their jagged teeth gleaming ominously. Her mother shuddered, remarking, “Those are scary, aren’t they?” Undeterred, the girl darted to the next exhibit — a tank of barracudas — and exclaimed, “There’s something more awful than that, Mummy!”
Her innocent quest for the next frightful spectacle stuck with me, and lately, it’s become a metaphor for the conservative movement’s obsession with outrage.
On platforms like X, I see a similar pattern unfolding daily. A post about a classroom poster in Wisconsin — declaring, “If your parents aren’t accepting of your identity, I’m your mom now,” with rainbow flags and cartoon bears — ignites a firestorm. Commenters pile on, each trying to outdo the last: “This is grooming!” “It’s a cult!” “Wait until you hear about what’s happening in another district!”
The refrain echoes that little girl’s cry: There’s something more awful than that. We’re trapped in an outrage cycle, endlessly seeking the next shocking story about what’s happening to our kids, from controversial school policies to perceived overreaches by educators. But this one-upmanship isn’t moving us forward — it’s keeping us stuck.
The conservative movement has mastered the art of highlighting what’s wrong, and that awareness is crucial. Parents need to know when their rights are being undermined, whether by schools, government policies, or cultural shifts. But awareness alone isn’t enough. We can’t keep pointing to the next “awful” thing without channeling that energy into action.
Outrage may grab attention, but it’s the steps we take afterward that create change. It’s time to shift our focus from amplifying the problem to building solutions — and that’s exactly what we’re doing at the Heritage Foundation.
I’m thrilled to lead the newly launched Parental Rights Network at Heritage, and I’m joined by Pat Blackburn, a passionate advocate who brings invaluable experience to this fight. Together, we’re taking the lessons we learned from our time at Moms for Liberty — where we saw the power of grassroots organizing and the hunger parents have to protect their role in their children’s lives — and using them to create real momentum in the parental rights and family empowerment movement.
The Parental Rights Network is designed to foster collaboration and create momentum by connecting individuals and groups across the country. Anyone can join the Network through a link on our landing page, opening the door to a community dedicated to strengthening parental rights.
Our mission is clear: we want to move beyond the outrage cycle and toward tangible outcomes. That means equipping parents with the tools to advocate for their rights, connecting them with like-minded communities, and pushing for policies that prioritize parental authority over government overreach.
To make this happen, we’re hosting weekly calls where members can share resources, tools, and information, and connect with others across the country to build a stronger, unified movement. We’ll also send out a weekly newsletter recapping key updates, insights, and opportunities to stay engaged. Instead of just sharing the next alarming story, we’re encouraging parents to take action — attend a school board meeting, engage with local lawmakers, or join forces with other families to demand transparency and accountability in every aspect when it comes to their kids.
The Network isn’t just about pointing out what’s wrong. It’s about building a coalition that can right those wrongs.
The conservative movement has a choice. We can keep chasing “something more awful than that,” letting outrage define our response, or we can harness that energy to create a future where parents are empowered and respected as the primary decision-makers for their children. At the Parental Rights Network, we’re choosing the latter. Join us by signing up through our landing page, participating in our weekly calls, and staying informed with our newsletter.
Together, we can move from outrage to action — because our kids deserve more than a cycle of anger; they deserve a movement that delivers real change.
* * *
Tiffany Justice is the chair of the Parental Rights Initiative at the Heritage Foundation.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial&amp;utm_campaign=memorial&amp;utm_content=editorialmemorialday">Get 40% Off New DailyWire+ Annual Memberships</a>
Correction: A previous subheading to this article read &#8220;Moms for Liberty joins forces with The Heritage Foundation to create real momentum for parental rights.&#8221; Moms for Liberty, however, is not working directly with the Heritage Foundation. We regret the error.

Schoolgirl runs from school bus to hug mother

Beyond Outrage: A Call To Action For Conservative Parents

Education

Heritage Foundation

Opinion

Parental Rights in Education

If you talk to any experienced and honest teacher these days, from elementary school on up, one of the first things they will tell you is how quickly gender ideology has taken hold. Virtually overnight, students began adopting fake pronouns and made-up genders.
To call this phenomenon &#8220;unnatural&#8221; would be a vast understatement. It&#8217;s obviously engineered. Teachers and school boards are pushing this nonsense on children who are far too young to know any better. The public school system has committed itself to indoctrinating children, in many cases without their parents&#8217; knowledge or consent. But after what happened yesterday at the Supreme Court, it&#8217;s very clear that accountability is finally coming for these ghouls.
After many years of spewing LGBT propaganda with total impunity, school districts will soon face major new restrictions on their ability to pollute the minds of elementary-school-age children. Based on how the justices acted during oral arguments yesterday, “Mahmoud v. Taylor” could easily turn out to be one of the most significant Supreme Court rulings of this generation.
Before we review the oral arguments, here is some background. The case began after Montgomery County Public Schools, the largest school district in Maryland — introduced a new &#8220;gender and sexuality curriculum.&#8221; Initially, students (or their parents) could opt out of this curriculum for any reason. But after a short period of time, the school district claimed that it wasn&#8217;t feasible to continue allowing opt outs. So it&#8217;s mandatory now. To give you an idea of what exactly this curriculum entails, here&#8217;s an image from one book that children are introduced to.
<div id="attachment_911559" style="width: 690px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-911559" class="wp-image-911559 size-full" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/GpJWV7kX0AE7j3U.jpeg" alt="Screenshot: What Are Your Words?" width="680" height="446" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/GpJWV7kX0AE7j3U.jpeg 680w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/GpJWV7kX0AE7j3U-300x197.jpeg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 680px) 100vw, 680px" />Screenshot: What Are Your Words?</div>
This is what&#8217;s apparently known as an &#8220;LGBT storybook.&#8221; This one&#8217;s called, “What Are Your Words?” As you can see, one line of dialogue reads, “My pronouns are like the weather. They change depending on how I feel.”
The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which is a nonprofit, reported on some other books that were included in this <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/will-scotus-back-parents-when-it-comes-to-lgbtq-storybooks" target="_blank" rel="noopener">new curriculum</a>:
<blockquote>[O]ne book tasks three and four-year-olds to search for images from a word list that includes &#8216;intersex flag,&#8217; &#8216;drag queen,&#8217; &#8216;underwear,&#8217; &#8216;leather,&#8217; and the name of a celebrated LGBTQ activist and sex worker. Another book advocates a child-knows-best approach to gender transitioning, telling students that a decision to transition doesn’t have to &#8216;make sense.&#8217; Teachers are instructed to say doctors only &#8216;guess&#8217; when identifying a newborn’s sex anyway.</blockquote>
When parents of varying religious faiths — including Muslims and Christians — objected to the idea that their 5-year-olds needed to be taught about &#8220;sex work&#8221; and &#8220;gender transitioning&#8221; by Left-wing activists posing as teachers, the school district told them they had no recourse. In fact, the district slandered the parents as bigots. All these parents were seeking was the ability to opt out of this indoctrination. They didn&#8217;t even demand that the classes be removed from the curriculum. But the school district denied their request. So the parents sued.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/mws-ep-1581-member-exclusive?elementPosition=3&amp;row=2&amp;rowHeadline=Latest+Episodes&amp;rowType=Horizontal+Show+Episodes+Carousel" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Matt Walsh Show</a></h3>
Which brings us to yesterday&#8217;s oral arguments. I want to begin with this question from Justice Alito, because it gets to the core of the issue. Alito wants to know why the school district is so hell-bent on forcing children to read books about homosexuality, transgenderism and so on. (To be clear, that&#8217;s what the school district is doing. They&#8217;re not merely providing these books in the school library. Teachers are actively telling students to read the books as part of class.) The truthful answer to Justice Alito&#8217;s question is simple: The Left understands that, if the LGBT movement is going to survive, it needs to indoctrinate new members at a very young age.
But the school district can&#8217;t say that out loud, of course. So instead, the lawyer representing the Montgomery school district&#8217;s superintendent, a man named Alan Schoenfeld, starts talking in circles about how impossible it would be, at a practical level, for the school district to allow students to opt out of this curriculum. But nothing he says actually makes sense. It gets so bad that, at the end of his rambling non-answer, Justice Kavanaugh chimes in to confirm that indeed, no one has any idea what the hell this guy is talking about. Watch:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="005 alito, whats the big deal" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Q118nmS1g2s?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
&nbsp;
As best I can tell, the lawyer for the school district is claiming that, because students might talk among themselves about certain LGBT books that are discussed in this curriculum, it&#8217;s therefore impossible to allow students to opt out of this kind of curriculum. In other words, whether or not students opt out, there&#8217;s a chance that they&#8217;ll hear about the materials that are discussed in these gay adventure books.
But this ignores a couple of obvious points.The big one is that, when a teacher is communicating a lesson to a class, it has a very different effect, as compared to one student talking to another student about a book during recess or whatever. The teacher is in a position of authority. It&#8217;s much easier for a 5-year-old to discount something another 5-year-old says, than it is to discount the wisdom of a 40-year-old teacher he&#8217;s told to trust. If this is an argument for anything, it&#8217;s an argument for not having these materials in the school to begin with. Which of course is the correct answer. But either way, it is not an argument against allowing parents to opt out.
The lawyer for the school district knows this but he can&#8217;t admit it. So he ends up confusing everyone in the room with a bunch of doublespeak. This kept happening throughout the oral arguments. Listen to this moment where Justice Gorsuch points out that, in Montgomery County, teachers are told to actively correct students who dare to suggest that men can&#8217;t become women. Gorsuch then asks the lawyer for Montgomery County whether this could constitute &#8220;coercion.&#8221; The obvious answer is yes. But instead of saying that, here&#8217;s the gibberish that the attorney comes back with:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="006 gorsuch, coercion, correcting himself" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/x3sWOLDR4Q0?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
&nbsp;
Justice Gorsuch gives an example where a student says, &#8220;a boy can&#8217;t be a girl.&#8221; And then the lawyer states that it&#8217;s not &#8220;coercive,&#8221; in any way, for the teacher to correct the student&#8217;s comment, in front of the entire class. He then changes his mind and says the opposite.
Even when he&#8217;s not contradicting himself, the school district&#8217;s lawyer managed to make a mockery of the entire case. 
Here&#8217;s his opening statement, for example:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="007 beginning with mr shonfeld" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/xkw27dw9T5g?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
&nbsp;
Yes, according to this attorney for the school district, there&#8217;s no difference between teaching elementary-school students about wars, and teaching them that boys can become girls. Telling students about the War of 1812 is just like telling them that it&#8217;s totally reasonable to chemically castrate minors.
One of the ways we know this isn&#8217;t true, aside from using basic common sense, is that there&#8217;s no army of parents demanding that schools stop teaching students about wars. That&#8217;s because it&#8217;s understood that teaching students about wars is not a general endorsement of violence. Additionally, everyone agrees that history is important and useful because it&#8217;s grounded in reality. On the other hand, gender ideology is just that — ideological.
This lawyer was not the only person to embarrass himself yesterday. That&#8217;s a given. After all, Ketanji Brown Jackson was also in attendance at the hearing. And as you&#8217;d expect, she did not disappoint. Single-handedly, she dropped the collective IQ in the room by about 10 points, just by opening her mouth. And of course, she opened her mouth on the side of indoctrinating children, because she takes the Left&#8217;s position on every issue. Behold, Ketanji Brown Jackson&#8217;s argument in favor of mandatory indoctrination in public schools:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="008 can just go to private school" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Y-FJrhGbwrw?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
&nbsp;
Yes, you can homeschool, says Ketanji Brown Jackson. You can pay for an expensive private school. Therefore, there&#8217;s no &#8220;burden&#8221; on these parents, apparently. It&#8217;s not a &#8220;burden&#8221; to have to pay more money, and change your child&#8217;s school, because Montgomery County decided to teach LGBT propaganda. And then the lawyer representing the parents responds, and points out that she&#8217;s completely wrong, and many other cases demonstrate why she&#8217;s wrong. And then she goes quiet and they move on.
Here’s one more clip from these arguments, involving Justice Alito questioning the school board&#8217;s lawyer. He follows up on this logic, about how the parents can supposedly just go to a private school. He begins by talking from the perspective of one of these parents:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="009 alito, too bad" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/hgRo17KtvU8?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
&nbsp;
This is what it looks like in the Supreme Court when &#8220;sparks fly,&#8221; so to speak. Alito is making his disdain for the school district&#8217;s argument extremely clear, which is exactly what he should do. They&#8217;re trying to force-feed gender ideology to children, and instead of owning it, they&#8217;re lying and telling the parents to pay more money to find a private school that won&#8217;t interfere with their religious liberties. But the Constitution doesn&#8217;t work that way. And it appears the Montgomery County school district, and school districts all over the country, are about to discover that.
This is not a close case. That&#8217;s why even the far-Left outlet Vox <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20250422191725/https://www.vox.com/scotus/409921/supreme-court-dont-say-gay-mahmoud-taylor">reported</a>: 
<blockquote>The Supreme Court’s &#8216;Don’t Say Gay&#8217; argument went disastrously for public schools.</blockquote>
At the moment, the most likely outcome is that, when very young children are involved, parents will retain the right to opt out of curriculums involving gender ideology, or any other extreme ideology that conflicts with their established religion. Everyone can see this coming.
And just to underscore that, yesterday Randi Weingarten, the head of one of the largest teachers&#8217; unions in the country, went on Fox News. And she admitted, right away, that she wouldn&#8217;t read these books in the classroom. Watch:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="010 Randi" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/luc0jWbW_HA?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
&nbsp;
We all know that Randi Weingarten isn&#8217;t saying this because she believes it. She&#8217;s maybe the most calculating political operative in the country, after Nancy Pelosi. But Weingarten understands when the Left is overplaying its hand. She knows that they&#8217;re on the cusp of yet another crushing defeat in their efforts to indoctrinate children, and she&#8217;s trying to soften that blow when it inevitably comes.
Unfortunately for Weingarten, the truth is, there&#8217;s no way to accomplish that. Gender ideology and LGBT activists, as we&#8217;ve discussed many times, are now extremely unpopular. They have alienated the entire country, to the point that they may have cost Democrats the last election. The only way an ideology like this can survive is by targeting children before they&#8217;re able to develop their cognitive abilities. That&#8217;s their only viable play. And in a few short months, after this case is inevitably decided against the public school system of Montgomery County, it&#8217;ll be much, much harder for these people to accomplish that.

The Lawyers Promoting Child Indoctrination To SCOTUS Were Absolutely Humiliated

Books

Brett Kavanaugh

Children's Books

Elementary Schools

Ketanji Brown Jackson

LGBTQ

Matt Walsh

Neil Gorsuch

Samuel Alito

Virginia

Gov. Brad Little (R) came through for the families of Idaho last Thursday morning by signing House Bill 93, the <a href="https://legislature.idaho.gov/sessioninfo/2025/legislation/h0093/">Parental Choice Tax Credit bill</a>, into law shortly before the 11:46 a.m. deadline. Idaho now has a school choice program for the first time in the state’s history.
The bill enacts a $50 million private school choice tax credit program with all schoolchildren statewide eligible. Idaho becomes the 14th state in the nation to enact universal (or near-universal) school choice, joining Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Utah, and West Virginia.
Upon signing the bill, Gov. Little <a href="https://gov.idaho.gov/pressrelease/gov-little-signs-house-bill-93-creating-the-parental-choice-tax-credit-program/">declared</a>, “With the passage of the $50 million Parental Choice Tax Credit program, Idaho boasts even more abundant schooling options for Idaho students and families.”
Early in February, the state House passed the bill by a vote of <a href="https://legislature.idaho.gov/sessioninfo/2025/legislation/h0093/">42-28</a>, providing hope to parents that Idaho may finally see school choice become a reality. The longtime Republican-controlled state had been void of any form of private school choice, resembling its Democratic-controlled West Coast neighbors of Washington, Oregon, and California.
On February 16, President Donald Trump weighed in with strong support by <a href="https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/114015581630558522">posting</a> on Truth Social: “Congratulations to Governor Brad Little, and Idaho Legislators, who are fighting to bring School Choice to their beautiful State. $50 Million Dollars to empower parents to provide the very best Education for their child – GREAT news for Idaho families. This Bill, which has my Complete and Total Support, MUST PASS!”
Then, on February 19, the Idaho Senate voted <a href="https://legislature.idaho.gov/sessioninfo/2025/legislation/h0093/">20-15</a> in favor of the bill, which sent it to the Governor’s desk for signature.
Yet, in uncanny measure for a red state governor, who already had the votes from the legislature and public support from the President of the United States, Gov. Little signaled it was not a given that he would sign the bill.
Before the bill reached his desk on February 21, Gov. Little’s Office had quickly placed an automatic voice message for all incoming calls. The message instructed callers to press one if the call relates to House Bill 93. From there, the voice recording stated that the Governor’s Office was only receiving calls from Idaho residents and only one call per household. It continued, “If you would like Gov. Little to sign House Bill 93, please press one. If you would like Gov. Little to veto House Bill 93, please press two.”
Within a few days of the bill reaching the governor, Press Secretary Joan Varsek <a href="https://www.eastidahonews.com/2025/02/thousands-of-phone-calls-flood-governors-desk-as-school-choice-bill-awaits-his-decision/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a> the Governor’s office received “thousands of calls, emails, and voicemails on both sides in reference to H.B. 93.”
On Monday, the specific number of responses was released, which totaled <a href="https://www.idahoednews.org/state-policy/governors-office-received-more-than-32k-requests-to-veto-house-bill-93/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">37,457</a>. Only 13.6% of those who reached out were in support of the governor signing the bill, while 86.4% were in opposition.
Yet, these last-minute cries for a veto were far from an accurate reflection of Idahoans’ support of school choice. A <a href="https://www.clubforgrowth.org/wp-content/uploads/securepdfs/2025/02/CfG_ID_ParentalChoiceTaxCredit_PollingMemo1.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">February 11-12 poll</a> showed that “nearly three-in-five Idaho voters support passing the Idaho Parental Choice Tax Credit bill.” The favorability of parental choice in education is nothing new as a 2024 poll of Idahoans by Boise State University found that <a href="https://www.boisestate.edu/sps/2024-idaho-public-policy-survey/#education" target="_blank" rel="noopener">49%</a> strongly favor or somewhat favor education funding following a student to a “private or religious” school whereas only <a href="https://www.boisestate.edu/sps/2024-idaho-public-policy-survey/#education" target="_blank" rel="noopener">41.1%</a> somewhat or strongly oppose it.
While the Governor may never reveal why he waited until just a few hours before the deadline to sign the bill or why his office set up the phone poll when the results didn’t sway him, parents with schoolchildren statewide are grateful nevertheless that he delivered.
With House Bill 93 now law, parents who opt for a different education avenue than the failing public school system will be eligible to receive a refundable tax credit of up to <a href="https://idahocapitalsun.com/2025/02/19/private-education-tax-credit-bill-heads-to-idaho-governor/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">$5,000</a> per student. The amount will increase to <a href="https://idahocapitalsun.com/2025/02/19/private-education-tax-credit-bill-heads-to-idaho-governor/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">$7,500</a> per student for those with special needs. Both amounts are thousands of dollars less than public schools spend per student, with unacceptable educational outcomes.
As evidenced by the latest National Assessment of Educational Progress Exam scores, <a href="https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/subject/publications/stt2024/pdf/2024219ID4.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">60%</a> of fourth-grade and <a href="https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/subject/publications/stt2024/pdf/2024219ID8.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">69%</a> of eighth-grade public school students in Idaho are not proficient in math. Reading is worse, as <a href="https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/subject/publications/stt2024/pdf/2024220ID4.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">69%</a> of fourth-grade and <a href="https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/subject/publications/stt2024/pdf/2024220ID8.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">68%</a> of eighth-grade public school students in Idaho aren’t proficient. That’s nearly seven out of ten children failed by the system and robbed of their future.
Idaho is long overdue for allowing parents the freedom to select a better learning option for their children. Parents should not be bound to a failing system and left hoping their child will be one of the three out of the ten students who learn to read and perform math proficiently by the eighth grade.
The Office of the Governor website, on the “About Governor Brad Little” page, <a href="https://gov.idaho.gov/our-governor/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">states</a>: “Governor Little is committed to making decisions through one lens: the lens of ensuring Idaho’s children and grandchildren have the best opportunities to stay in Idaho and for the ones who have left to choose to return.
While it may have been in the eleventh hour, Gov. Little took action, recognizing that school choice is the solution to ensuring Idaho’s children and grandchildren have the best opportunities. Continuing course without an exit option for families from schools failing to provide students with proficiency would plague not only each child’s life but the state’s future. Not to mention, families with schoolchildren who have left Idaho would not have been incentivized to return when school choice abounds in other red states.
But thanks to a monumental signature last Thursday, that won’t be the case for the Gem State.
* * *
Dr. Keri D. Ingraham is a Senior Fellow at Discovery Institute, Director of the American Center for Transforming Education, and a Senior Fellow at Independent Women’s Forum.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Idaho State Capitol sunset, Boise

This State’s Governor Delivers On School Choice In The Eleventh Hour

Charter Schools

Idaho

Schools

President Donald Trump hit the ground running, reforming K-12 education and restoring parental rights during his second week back in the Oval Office, which coincided with the 15th annual National School Choice Week.
Last week, President Trump issued the “<a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/expanding-educational-freedom-and-opportunity-for-families/">Expanding Educational Freedom and Opportunity for Families</a>” executive order. According to a White House <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/01/fact-sheet-president-donald-j-trump-expands-educational-opportunities-for-american-families/">fact sheet</a>, the order “recognizes that parents, not the government, play a fundamental role in choosing and directing the upbringing and education of their children.”
The <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/expanding-educational-freedom-and-opportunity-for-families/">executive order</a> states that within 60 days, “the Secretary of Education shall issue guidance regarding how States can use Federal formula funds to support K-12 educational choice initiatives.” It also “directs the Secretary of Education to prioritize school choice programs in the Department’s discretionary grant programs.”
Additionally, the Department of Health and Human Services must issue guidance related to “how states receiving block grants for children and families can use those funds to support educational alternatives, including private and faith-based options.”
Furthermore, the <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/expanding-educational-freedom-and-opportunity-for-families/">executive order</a> requires the Secretary of Defense to review and make a plan for how military families “may use funds from the Department of Defense to attend schools of their choice … beginning in the 2025-2026 school year.” Finally, the Secretary of the Interior must submit a plan concerning “how families with students attending Bureau of Indian Education schools can use federal funds to send their children to the school of their choice.”
With clarity and resolve, the President <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/expanding-educational-freedom-and-opportunity-for-families/">communicated</a>: “It is the policy of my Administration to support parents in choosing and directing the upbringing and education of their children.”
The timing couldn’t have been more fitting as it was the same day the National Assessment of Educational Progress <a href="https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/">exam scores</a> were released. The scores revealed that <a href="https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/reports/reading/2024/g4_8/?grade=8">7 out of 10</a> schoolchildren cannot read on grade level. Math scores showed that <a href="https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/reports/mathematics/2024/g4_8/?grade=4">6 out of 10</a> fourth-grade students and <a href="https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/reports/mathematics/2024/g4_8/?grade=8">7 out of 10</a> eighth-grade students are not proficient for their grade. These scores make an <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/new-national-test-scores-make-undeniable-case-for-school-choice">undeniable case for school choice</a>.
Also, on Wednesday, the President issued the “<a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/ending-radical-indoctrination-in-k-12-schooling/">Ending Radical Indoctrination in K-12 Schooling</a>” executive order. The order <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/ending-radical-indoctrination-in-k-12-schooling/">stated</a> that “In recent years &#8230; parents have witnessed schools indoctrinate their children in radical, anti-American ideologies while deliberately blocking parental oversight.”
The Secretary of Education, Secretary of Defense, and the Secretary of Health and Human Services, consulting with the Attorney General, have 90 days to formulate an “Ending Indoctrination Strategy.” It will include <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/ending-radical-indoctrination-in-k-12-schooling/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">a plan</a> for “eliminating Federal funding or support for illegal and discriminatory treatment and indoctrination in K-12 schools, including based on gender ideology and discriminatory equity ideology; and protecting parental rights.”
The historic week also included the Trump Administration U.S. Department of Education issuing a <a href="https://www.ed.gov/about/news/press-release/us-department-of-education-enforce-2020-title-ix-rule-protecting-women" target="_blank" rel="noopener">press release</a> stating that it “will return to enforcing Title IX protections on the basis of biological sex in school and on campuses.” This was a necessary measure as <a href="https://edworkforce.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=411780">the Biden Administration’s rule</a> had redefined the term sex to include ‘gender identity,’ therefore removing protection and equal opportunity for women.
The week prior, under the direction of the President, the <a href="https://www.ed.gov/about/news/press-release/us-department-of-education-takes-action-eliminate-dei" target="_blank" rel="noopener">U.S. Department of Education</a> took action to “eliminate harmful Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives.” <a href="https://www.chalkboardnews.com/issues/cultural-issues/article_89d2f95a-da74-11ef-881f-c31173f69a5c.html?seyid=48320" target="_blank" rel="noopener">More specifically</a>, “The agency said staff leading DEI initiatives have been placed on administrative leave, and over 200 web pages with DEI resources that ‘promote or endorse harmful ideological programs’ have been deleted. It also killed over $2.5 million of DEI contracts.”
President Trump is far from alone in the charge to reform education and empower parents with educational choice for their children. At the state level, last week, the Tennessee House and Senate passed the <a href="https://tneducationfreedom.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Education Freedom Act of 2025</a>. With Gov. Bill Lee’s signature, Tennessee will become the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/with-gov-lees-signature-tennessee-will-become-13th-state-to-enact-universal-school-choice" target="_blank" rel="noopener">13th state in the nation</a> to enact universal (or near-universal) school choice, joining Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Utah, and West Virginia.
At the federal level, last week, Senators Bill Cassidy and Tim Scott, along with <a href="https://www.cassidy.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/cassidy-scott-lead-colleagues-in-reintroducing-bill-to-expand-school-choice-educational-opportunity/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">24 Republican colleagues</a>, introduced <a href="https://www.cassidy.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/ECCA.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Educational Choice for Children Act</a>. The <a href="https://www.theadvertiser.com/story/news/local/2025/01/29/cassidy-scott-introduces-bill-expanding-school-choice-and-education-opportunity/77716817007/">bill</a> “would provide $10 billion in annual tax credits for individuals and businesses to fund K-12 scholarships.” If passed, roughly 2 million children across the country will have access to scholarship funds for private school tuition and fees, and other educational expenses, including homeschooling.
According to Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, <a href="https://x.com/WhiteHouse/status/1885388215692988724" target="_blank" rel="noopener">during a briefing</a> on Friday, President Trump communicated that “American education should focus on cultivating patriotic citizens who are ready for the workforce.” The President is not only right, but his executive orders last week to empower parental choice and end radical indoctrination in K-12 schooling are essential and foundational steps in the right direction.
More of these swift and sound common-sense measures are needed and undoubtedly on the way from this Administration.
* * *
<a href="https://www.discovery.org/p/ingraham/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Dr. Keri D. Ingraham</a> is a Senior Fellow at Discovery Institute, Director of the American Center for Transforming Education, and a Senior Fellow at Independent Women’s Forum.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Mom and Son Walking to School for First Day of Classes

President Trump Is Wasting No Time Reforming K-12 Education

Department of Education

Executive Orders

K-12

President Trump

Timcast

A Father’s Tragic Fight To Save His Son From Gender Ideology

Gender

Parenting

transgender surgery

California Democrat Governor Gavin Newsom is being sued by a group over Assembly Bill 1955, which bars schools from notifying parents about their child’s desire to change their sex and be referred to by incorrect pronouns.
Newsom signed the bill into law on July 15.
The bill <a href="https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240AB1955">states</a>, “This bill would prohibit school districts, county offices of education, charter schools, and the state special schools, and a member of the governing board or body of those educational entities, from enacting or enforcing any policy, rule, or administrative regulation that requires an employee or a contractor to disclose any information related to a pupil’s sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression to any other person without the pupil’s consent unless otherwise required by law, as provided. The bill would prohibit employees or contractors of those educational entities from being required to make such a disclosure unless otherwise required by law, as provided.&#8221;
“This law is an attack on fundamental parental rights,” America First Legal, which is suing Newsom, <a href="https://aflegal.org/america-first-legal-sues-gavin-newsom-on-behalf-of-parents-and-the-city-of-huntington-beach-for-forcing-schools-to-hide-a-childs-gender-transition-from-parents/">stated</a>. “It prevents school districts from requiring parental notification if their child begins to exhibit gender confusion, such as by requesting to be called by a name and pronoun of the opposite sex. The law does not set an age limit—schools cannot notify parents even if preschoolers are being socially ‘transitioned.’ It also prevents schools from disciplining employees who are initiating or facilitating social ‘transitioning,’ which courts have recognized is a type of medical intervention or treatment that medical professionals have recognized can inflict serious short-term and long-term harm.”
“This law violates the 14th Amendment, which guarantees the rights of parents to make decisions about their minor children regarding all medical treatment—in this case, social ‘transitioning,’” America First continued. “Fit parents are presumed to act in the best interest of their child. The government cannot intervene in their relationship simply because it does not like the parents’ decision. Whether a child socially ‘transitions’ or announces their sexuality is a personal and private issue, not an educational issue or one to be decided by the government. The State of California is thus intruding in a very personal, private matter—communication on one of the most intimate of topics between a parent and child—in violation of the U.S. Constitution.”
In September 2022, AFL <a href="https://aflegal.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/1-2022-09-07-Complaint.pdf">sued</a> the  Eau Claire Area School District, Wisconsin, over its policy of “hiding critical information regarding a child’s health from his or her parents.” In November 2023, AFL <a href="https://aflegal.org/america-first-legal-sues-mesa-public-schools-for-promoting-gender-transitions-of-students-without-notifying-parents/">sued</a> Mesa Public Schools for promoting “gender transitions” of students without alerting their parents.

Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA)

Newsom Sued Over Bill Barring Schools Telling Parents Their Child Is ‘Transitioning’

Gender Transition

A California school district compelled high school freshmen to audit their “privileged” identities and present on “systems of oppression,” documents first obtained by Parents Defending Education reveal and exclusively shared with The Daily Wire.
California’s Alameda Unified School District’s ethnic studies curriculum required students to assess their own level of privilege as they were taught Critical Race Theory and extreme gender theory. Students were given handouts including “My Relationship with Privilege and Oppression,” which purports to tell students “whether you are privileged or oppressed.” White, male, Christian students without a criminal record are singled out as the epitome of privilege.
The document lists 29 different identities and characteristics—including race, ethnicity, nationality, sex, religion and education level—that are used to determine one’s alleged level of privilege or marginalization. “Who am I as an intersectional human being,” it asks students. Another assignment, called “A Map of Myself,” asks students to audit their own identities, categorizing each as a “position of privilege or marginalization.”
“For each identity domain … consider if it puts you in a position of privilege or marginalization,” the assignment reads before asking students to list their race, ethnicity, biological sex, sexual orientation, and religion. Footnotes cite &#8220;anti-racist&#8221; author Robin DiAngelo and argue that “race is a socially constructed system.”
“Considering all your social identities listed in the table above, on a daily basis, which ones are you most aware or conscious of?” the assignment inquires before going on to ask what “the most negative or difficult” thing about that identity is.
The documents appear to be representative of the course writ large. An ethnic studies course syllabus divides the class into four sections, including “power and oppression,” which focuses on “who creates the master narrative and how that impacts the lived experiences of different groups” by creating the “understanding that laws &amp; policies are not objective.&#8221;
“Individuals obsessed with forcing this oppressor vs. oppressed paradigm are poisoning the minds of children,” Parents Defending Education senior adviser Michele Exner told The Daily Wire. “They want to perpetuate a victimhood mentality based on how many ideological boxes someone can check off. What they should be teaching is math, reading, writing, and history—all subjects that will actually help students of all backgrounds excel instead of pushing this divisive content in classrooms.”
Students are expected to “identify social systems that structure and perpetuate power, privilege, and oppression” and “identify how identities intersect to create power, privilege, and oppression.”
The syllabus also details a portion of the course titled “resistance and liberation,” which centers on the “history of resisting oppression as carried out by the oppressed groups themselves,” a theme that supposedly “directly challenges the ‘White Savior’ narrative.” Course vocabulary terms include “white supremacy,” “white privilege,” “microaggressions,” and “colonized mind.”
Another assignment required students to study the “Four I’s Of Oppression&#8221;: &#8220;ideological, institutional, interpersonal, and internalized” oppression. The assignment required groups of students to draw on those &#8220;Four I&#8217;s&#8221; to make a slideshow on “white supremacy, patriarchy, heteronormativity, or cisnormativity.”
One course document indicates that students partook in a “<a href="https://thefederalist.com/2021/12/06/critical-race-trove-from-california-district-tells-students-how-to-use-witchcraft-on-people-who-say-all-lives-matter/">privilege walk</a>,” an exercise in which participants form a line and take steps forwards or backwards depending on their response to a <a href="https://youtu.be/hD5f8GuNuGQ?si=olRh_QdQ_jyyUU-J">series of questions</a>. The exercise is intended to indicate the level of privilege each person supposedly has relative to each other.
“In your own words, describe the emotions and thoughts you experienced during the privilege walk. How has it challenged or confirmed your perceptions of privilege and inequality?”
Students were also asked to write an essay on successful political organizing strategies, including how leftwing movements “use grassroots organizing and social media to be successful.” Students could choose from a list of leftist movements to discuss, including Black Lives Matter and the Black Panthers.
Alameda Unified School District did not respond to a request for comment.

Governor Gavin Newsom Visits School To Highlight State’s Reopening Efforts

EXCLUSIVE: California School District Makes Students Audit Their Privilege, Give Presentation On Oppression

Critical Race Theory

A parental rights group filed a federal lawsuit on Wednesday accusing a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/new-york" target="_blank" rel="noopener">New York</a> school district of establishing “speech codes” that violate the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/first-amendment" target="_blank" rel="noopener">First Amendment</a> rights of conservative students, according to documents first shared with The Daily Wire.
The suit was filed by Parents Defending Education against Croton-Harmon Union Free School District north of New York City over its harassment and discrimination policies. It argues that the First and Fourteenth Amendment rights of students have been violated by the policies, which include requirements for students to use the “preferred pronouns&#8221; of others.
“The District has adopted multiple ‘harassment’ policies that prohibit a broad swath of controversial speech at the heart of the First Amendment,” the <a href="https://defendinged.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/1_Complaint.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">lawsuit</a> says. “In so doing, the District unconstitutionally discriminates based on viewpoint, requires a student to affirm another student’s gender identity when inconsistent with that student’s sex, prohibits a substantial amount of protected speech, and uses vague terms that an average student cannot understand.”
The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The suit is asking for the judge to rule that the <a href="https://defendinged.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/PDEvCHExhibits.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">district policies</a> 0110, 0110-R, 0115, 0115-R, 0115-E, 5300, 4526, and 4526-R are unconstitutional. These policies “punish students for their speech and compel them to mouth support for the District’s preferred views at all times of day, whether at school or not,” according to the suit.
In the suit, Parents Defending Education noted that its members included multiple parents who had students in the district who felt like their ability to speak freely had been restricted.
The challenged policies describe discrimination as including “restrictions on the use of names or pronouns,” and include an acceptable use policy for electronics about the sending of “hate mail.” Additionally, the policies restrict speech determined to be “offensive,” “disparaging,” “degrading,” “derogatory,” &#8220;intimidating,” or “demeaning.”
According to Parents Defending Education, the policies are overly broad and allow students to be punished for their conservative opinions.
“Speech codes punish students for unpopular speech labeled as ‘harassment,’ ‘bullying,’ ‘hate speech,’ or ‘incivility’ — categories so broad that school officials can use them to ban speech based on one’s firmly held views including religious views, or to compel speech contrary to those views,” the suit says. “When these policies impose vague, overbroad, or viewpoint-based restrictions on speech, they are unconstitutional.”
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1700760801843000&amp;usg=AOvVaw2PQrVSrJfhxNb4LcARqniG">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
Parents Defending Education has been active across the country in efforts to push for accountability and transparency at public schools.
“Over the past century, the Supreme Court has made abundantly clear that students have robust First Amendment rights – and that education officials may not trample on these rights at their pleasure,” Parents Defending Education President Nicole Neily said in a statement to The Daily Wire. “Silencing unpopular viewpoints and compelling the speech of students in a public school system is fundamentally un-American.”
Croton-Harmon Union Free School District did not respond to a request for comment.

Transgender Symbol and Pencils With The Color of Lgbt Flag

EXCLUSIVE: Parents Group Challenges New York School District Over ‘Speech Codes’ On Pronouns

First Amendment

Free Speech

Gender Pronouns

New York

Menu