A Pine-Richland parent is suing the school district over its transgender nondiscrimination policy, alleging it violates parents’ rights to raise their children as they see fit.
The lawsuit, filed Friday in federal court by conservative group America First Legal, is causing concern among parents of transgender children in the district who say the policy in question has worked well to support their families.
Filed under the pseudonym Jane Doe, it seeks to stop the district from enforcing the policy.
“They’re just trying to cause chaos and make us feel unwelcome,” said Nila Griffin, who has a transgender daughter in sixth grade. “You need to leave these kids alone and stop using them as a political pawn.”
A spokeswoman for the district said she could not comment on pending litigation. Messages left with the solicitor, superintendent and individual board members were not returned.
Pine-Richland was at the center of a national debate in 2016 when three transgender students filed a federal lawsuit over a policy requiring students to use either a unisex facility or the bathroom that corresponded to their biological sex.
The case settled in 2017, resulting in the current policy under fire.
Now, more than six years later, Pine-Richland, which has seen a conservative shift on its school board in recent elections — it is now an 8-1 majority — looks like it’s headed back into controversy.
Wally Zimolong, the attorney representing the plaintiff in the current lawsuit along with America First Legal, called the policy in question “radical” and “clearly unconstitutional.”
The policy explains how the district will address transgender issues, privacy and confidentiality. It also spells out how the district will assist students through the transition to live openly “in a manner consistent with their gender identity.”
The policy gives students the right to request a student support team, including the building principal, guidance counselor, nurse, school psychologist and teacher.
It also notes that in some cases, disclosure to a parent or guardian could carry a risk for the student, such as physical or emotional abuse, abandonment or removal from the home.
According to the complaint, the policy requires the district “to determine whether the student’s ‘health, well being, and safety’ will be harmed if the student’s parent is notified.”
In doing that analysis, it continued, the complaint claimed without evidence that the district will ask about parents’ religious and political beliefs about gender identity.
According to the lawsuit, the plaintiff found her child viewing videos online that included transgender people advocating for transitioning. Her child also recently started to hang out with a new friend group including transgender children.
“Doe is concerned that if her child does begin exhibiting signs of gender confusion or gender dysphoria, the school will immediately begin affirming her before Doe knows and can take steps to help her child obtain appropriate medical care,” the lawsuit said.
According to the complaint, the plaintiff asked that the district notify her within three days of any gender identity issues expressed by her child and sent written notice to the district that, without her written consent, her child shall not be referred to any mental health counselor or social worker for evaluation.
She also met with the principal to discuss those issues.
At the meeting, according to the complaint, district officials told her “under no circumstances” would they notify her of any request to use different pronouns by her child or anything else regarding a desire to transition to a different gender. They also said that she had no parental rights under the policy, the lawsuit said.
“The school district’s representatives further stated to Doe that they would only notify her if ‘legally required to do so.’”
According to the lawsuit, the policy requires school district personnel to keep secret from parents or guardians “critical details about a child’s health, welfare and upbringing.”
It further claims that the district engages in “a secret psychological evaluation of the student, including students as young as 5, conducted by government psychologists, who assist the child with a plan in transitioning to a new gender.”
But on Monday, Zimolong said they had no examples of such an evaluation occurring. Still, he said, that’s how plaintiff interprets the policy.
“That can be done with children as young as five without any parental notification or involvement,” Zimolong said. “That’s what the policy says.”
But Omar Gonzalez-Pagan, an attorney with Lambda Legal Defense who helped craft the district’s policy following the settlement in the bathroom case, said those claims are false.
“What they call a secret mental health evaluation is school guidance counselors and psychologists meeting with students — which they do everyday,” he said.
The lawsuit alleges that the policy violates the plaintiff’s constitutional rights under the 14th Amendment allowing parents to raise their children how they choose.
The policy “violates Doe’s fundamental liberty interest to make decisions concerning the care, custody, and control of her child,” the complaint said.
Zimolong said there are two aspects to the policy that he believes violate his client’s constitutional rights: the district choosing to honor a child’s wishes — without parental consent — to use the pronouns and names the child chooses; and the district allowing the student to “secretly” meet with a student support team to come up with a timeline to transition.
“That’s something I haven’t seen,” he said. “It differentiates this case from the other cases.
“That’s a radical policy and clearly unconstitutional.”
But Gonzalez-Perez said the current lawsuit is without legal merit.
“There’s really no reason to bring this case,” he said. “This is a political document full of falsehoods, political rhetoric and little facts.”
He said that the complaint does not allege that the plaintiff has a transgender child, and therefore she may not even have legal standing to file the complaint.
“This is somebody who, personally, philosophically, disagrees with this policy,” Gonzalez-Pagan said. “There is not actual harm being showed, and that’s the first part of getting into court,” he said. “To me, this sounds like a manufactured lawsuit, and America First is known to challenge these policies elsewhere.”
A recent similar suit by the Washington, D.C.-based organization, founded by former Trump advisor Stephen Miller, was thrown out by a federal judge in Wisconsin for a lack of standing.
“They just don’t want the school district to respect and provide a supportive environment for trans kids, and they’re trying to undermine these policies in any way that they can,” said Gonzalez-Pagan. “This is the type of policy you wish other districts had.”
Griffin moved into the Pine-Richland School District in 2018 when her daughter, who had already begun living as a girl, was in kindergarten.
“The school was fantastic,” Griffin said.
The support team, including the psychologist, teachers, nurse and principal had meetings with her family every six months and offered training to the staff for how to work with a student that young.
“We chose this district, specifically, because of the bathroom suit and policy.”
“The biggest problem we’re seeing is the small faction coming in and taking over school boards,” Griffin said. “They’re very loud, and they’re very powerful.”
Griffin’s daughter is now in sixth grade and open about who she is.
While her daughter has heard some comments at school — she told other students what her name used to be, and they sometimes call her it — Griffin said the majority of the people in the community are supportive, or at least tolerant.
But with the change in school board, Griffin said, it has put pressure on the families with transgender or LGBTQ children.
“It makes us feel very unwelcome,” she said.
Donna Azar has a son in third grade in Pine-Richland. Although he still identifies as a boy, Azar said he dresses like a girl.
She and her husband have always been supportive of him.
“He’s been the same person all along,” she said. “He’s beautiful.”
At school, Azar said, the support team for her son worked with her family.
“There are so many people eager to help and be supportive.”
Although it has been safe for her son at her home, Azar said that’s not always the case.
That’s why the district’s policy is so important, she said.
“This lawsuit is completely a false narrative,” she said. “The school wants to work with parents. No one is secretly transitioning your kids.”
Paula Reed Ward is a TribLive reporter covering federal and Allegheny County courts. She joined the Trib in 2019 after spending nearly 17 years at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, where she was part of a Pulitzer Prize-winning team. She is the author of “Death by Cyanide.” She can be reached at [email protected].
