U.S Court of Appeals

(1.) 1st Circuit: Foote v. Ludlow School Committee (Massachusetts)

Court Ruling 

Article 

• Jurisdictions: U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
• Overview: Parents sued the Ludlow, Massachusetts, school district, alleging that school officials assisted their child in a gender transition without their knowledge or consent, thereby infringing upon their parental rights.
• Outcome: The First Circuit ruled against the parents, stating that the school’s actions did not constitute a violation of their constitutional rights. The court emphasized that while parents have fundamental rights concerning the upbringing of their children, these rights do not extend to dictating the administrative policies of public schools.

(2.) 1st Circuit: LAVIGNE v. GREAT SALT BAY COMMUNITY SCHOOL BOARD (Maine)

Amber Lavigne, a mother from Newcastle, Maine, filed a lawsuit against the Great Salt Bay Community School Board in December 2022, alleging that school officials facilitated her 13-year-old child’s gender transition without her knowledge or consent. She claimed that a school social worker provided her child with a chest binder—a garment used to flatten the chest—and that school staff began using a new name and pronouns for her child without informing her, thereby violating her parental rights under the 14th Amendment. 

Legal Proceedings:

• District Court Decision: In May 2024, U.S. District Judge Jon Levy dismissed Lavigne’s lawsuit, stating that while parents might expect to be informed about their child’s gender identity matters at school, the complaint did not provide sufficient facts to establish that the school district had an unwritten policy of withholding such information from parents. 
• Appeal: Following the dismissal, Lavigne appealed the decision to the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston. Oral arguments were held in October 2024, where her attorney argued that the district had an unwritten policy allowing school officials to make decisions regarding her child’s well-being without parental involvement, thus violating her constitutionally protected parental rights. 

Current Status: As of March 2025, the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has not yet issued a ruling on Lavigne’s appeal.

(3.) 6th Circuit: Meade v. Rockford Public Schools (Michigan)

Article

Mead v. Rockford Public School District is a legal case in which Dan and Jennifer Mead sued the Rockford Public School District in Michigan, alleging that school officials facilitated their 13-year-old daughter’s social transition—referring to her by a masculine name and male pronouns—without their knowledge or consent. They claim this action violated their constitutional rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments. 

Case Background:

• Parental Concerns: The Meads’ daughter, diagnosed with autism, anxiety, and depression, was receiving support from school counselors. The parents were in regular communication with the school regarding her well-being.
• School’s Actions: Without informing the Meads, the school began addressing their daughter by a masculine name and male pronouns. School staff altered official records to conceal this change when communicating with the parents. The Meads discovered the situation when a school employee inadvertently included the masculine name in an evaluation form. 

Legal Claims:

• First Amendment: The Meads argue that the school’s actions infringed upon their right to raise their child in accordance with their religious beliefs, which recognize only two genders assigned at birth.
• Fourteenth Amendment: They contend that the school district violated their fundamental right to direct the upbringing and education of their child by excluding them from significant decisions affecting her welfare. 

Current Status: As of March 16, 2025, the case is ongoing in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan. The school district has filed a motion to dismiss, which the court has yet to rule on.

(4.) 10th Circuit: Lee v. Poudre School District R-1 (Colorado)

Erin Lee and her husband filed a lawsuit against the Poudre School District in Colorado, alleging that school officials facilitated their 12-year-old daughter’s attendance at a Genders and Sexualities Alliance (GSA) club meeting without their knowledge or consent. They claimed this action infringed upon their 14th Amendment rights to direct the upbringing of their child. 

Case Background:

• Incident: In 2021, Erin Lee’s daughter was invited by a teacher to attend what she believed to be an art club. However, it was a GSA meeting where topics of gender identity and sexuality were discussed. The parents alleged that this led their daughter to question her gender identity, resulting in mental health challenges. 
• Legal Action: The Lees, along with another family, sued the Poudre School District and its Board of Education, asserting that the district’s actions violated their constitutional rights under the 14th Amendment. 

Court Proceedings:

• District Court Decision: In December 2023, U.S. District Judge Nina Y. Wang dismissed the case, stating that while parents have fundamental rights concerning the upbringing of their children, these rights do not extend to dictating the administrative policies of public schools. 
• Appeal: The plaintiffs appealed the dismissal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit, seeking to revive their claims against the school district. As of February 2025, the appeal remains pending.

(5.)  11th Circuit: Littlejohn v. Leon County (Florida)

Court Ruling

Article

Littlejohn v. Leon County School Board: In Florida, parents sued the school district, alleging that officials facilitated their child’s gender transition without their knowledge or consent, thereby infringing upon their parental rights. The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the district court’s dismissal, determining that the school’s actions did not violate the parents’ substantive due process rights.