Murrieta Nonprofit Sues CA Over Law Protecting Parents Of Trans Kids

MURRIETA, CA — A lawsuit was filed out of Murrieta this week, challenging a California law that allows families to flee to California from states that prosecute parents for allowing their children to receive gender-affirming care.

The lawsuit comes after Senate Bill 107 was introduced by Sen. Anthony Wiener (D-San Francisco) and signed into law in September by Gov. Gavin Newsom. The law provides legal protections for parents and legal guardians fleeing states that ban gender-affirming health care for youths.

A news release from Murrieta-based Advocates For Faith & Freedom announced the lawsuit Tuesday on behalf of the nonprofit, Our Watch.

Pastor Tim Thompson of 412 Temecula Valley church serves as president of Murrieta-based Our Watch.

“One of my top priorities has been the preservation of parental rights, and I believe SB 107 is a dangerous, irresponsible law that is an assault on those rights,” Thompson said in Tuesday's news release.

"The bill," according to the release, "denies parents the right to access their child’s medical information as it relates to 'gender-affirming health care' or 'gender-affirming mental health care' and allows California courts to take emergency jurisdiction over a child seeking gender-affirming care."

However, experts say the law actually protects parents of trans kids. In fact, in most cases, youth under 18 years old in California must obtain the permission of their parents or guardian to access any medical treatment. There are a few exceptions to this rule, but none are related to gender-affirming care.

“California law requires parent or guardian consent for gender-affirming care for minors,” Rebecca Gudeman, senior director of health for the National Center for Youth Law, told WNEP after the bill was signed by the governor. “Senate Bill 107 does not change any laws or policies related to who may consent for health care in California.”

Instead, the experts say, the law focuses on how California should handle investigations by other states — specifically, investigations into parents and guardians from out of state who seek gender-affirming care for their kids in the Golden State.

Several states now have laws in place that allow parents to be prosecuted if they seek gender-affirming care for their children.

Senate Bill 107 allows California to resist another state’s attempt to remove parental custody if the proposed removal is based on those parents' efforts to get gender-affirming care for their child, Wendy Seiden, a visiting professor at Chapman University’s Fowler School of Law, told Politifact.

Additionally, Courtney Joslin, a Martin Luther King Jr. professor of law at the University of California, Davis School of Law, told Politifact the law has nothing to do with who gets custody of a child during a dispute and makes no mention of allowing the court to take custody.

"It’s just describing which courts have jurisdiction in those multi-state [custody disputes]," she said.

The law clarifies that California courts have jurisdiction over any custody cases that may arise from parents bringing their children to the Golden State for care. Furthermore, SB 107 does not give California permission to take custody of a child if one parent disagrees with a child’s decision to seek gender-affirming health care, according to the experts.

Asaf Orr, a senior staff attorney and Transgender Youth Project director at the National Center for Lesbian Rights, told Politifact the law doesn’t give California carte blanche to remove a child from a parent’s custody.

If parents disagree over whether their child should receive gender-affirming care in California, a state court would hear that case and rule based on evidence provided by both parents, Orr told Politifact. Out-of-state laws would not apply to the court’s determination.

Wiener maintains SB 107 has three main components:

"1) It prohibits the enforcement of a law of another state that authorizes a state agency to remove a child from their parent or guardian based on the parent or guardian allowing their child to receive gender-affirming health care. The bill would prevent California’s law enforcement from cooperating with any individual or out-of-state agency regarding the provision of lawful gender-affirming health care performed in this state. As a result, families will be able to come to California to avoid having their trans children taken away from them.

"2) It bars compliance in California with any out-of-state subpoena seeking health or other related information about people who come to California to receive gender-affirming care, if the subpoena relates to efforts to criminalize individuals or remove children from their homes for having received gender-affirming care. Some states are considering legislation that would extend their criminal prohibitions even to residents who travel out of state to receive gender-affirming health care.

"3) It prohibits law enforcement participation in the arrest or extradition of an individual that criminalizes allowing a person to receive or provide gender-affirming health care where that conduct is lawful in California and to the fullest extent permitted by federal law. It will declare that it is California’s public policy that any out-of-state criminal arrest warrant for someone based on violating another state’s law against receiving gender-affirming care is the lowest priority for law enforcement in California."

Tuesday's lawsuit alleges that SB 107 was passed in direct hostility to the laws of conservative states like Alabama and Texas and is therefore unconstitutional.

The lawsuit is just one of many attempts by Pastor Thompson to make the conservative voice "the dominating force in California politics." Read more here:

• Conservative Christians Eye Control Of Southwest RivCo School Boards
• Critical Race Theory Banned In Temecula Schools By Newly Formed Board