(CN) — A federal judge has thrown out a lawsuit by a mother who said her First Amendment rights were violated by a Chico Unified School District policy.
The policy protects the rights of transgender students to use the name and pronouns they prefer. Under the rules, there’s no parental notice unless the student consents.
U.S. District Judge Daniel Calabretta in Sacramento dismissed the lawsuit brought by Aurora Regino, a mother of two children at Chico Unified, saying there’s no constitutional right that requires the school district to seek a parent’s consent before using a student’s preferred name and pronouns.
In his ruling Thursday, the Joe Biden appointee noted the dueling interests of parents (who want to know if their child struggles with gender dysphoria and often want to support them) and that of schools (which want to ensure a safe space for students to explore their identities, “as children do in myriad ways in the school environment.”)
“Where to draw that line, however, is not for this court to resolve,” Calabretta wrote. “Nor is the wisdom of the district’s policy. The much more limited question presented by the school district’s motion to dismiss is whether the United States Constitution has anything to say on the matter. The court concludes it does not.”
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals last year sent Regino’s lawsuit back to the district court in Sacramento after finding that the previous judge presiding over the case had used “erroneous legal standards” to dismiss her claims.
However, Calabretta’s analysis of Regino’s purported fundamental rights found either that they weren’t infringed by the school district’s policy or that they weren’t so broad as to require disclosure. He noted that a student’s gender identity was a personal matter and not one initiated by school officials.
“Declining to inform a parent about a student’s desire to use a different name or pronouns at school by definition protects a student’s privacy,” the judge said. And he noted there were valid reasons for protecting that privacy.
“While the court has no reason to doubt plaintiff’s assertion that she is supportive of her children and there is no indication of potential abuse, that is sadly not true in all families,” he said. “The school could reasonably conclude that some students might be placed in danger if their parents were informed they had requested to be called by a different name or pronouns than that which reflected their sex at birth.”
The judge said further amendment of the lawsuit would be futile and dismissed it with prejudice.
“We are disappointed in the district court’s ruling, which ignores the crucial role parents play in the lives of their children,” Josh Dixon, an attorney for Regino, said in an email. “We are appealing the decision, and we continue to expect that Ms. Regino’s rights will be vindicated.”
Regino first sued in 2023, after one of her children told a counselor she “felt like a boy.” The child began using a different name and male pronouns but asked the counselor not to inform their mother.
That spring, the counselor met with the student and discussed topics like “top surgery” and “breast binding.” The counselor also advised the student against telling their mother. The student ultimately did tell their grandmother, who told Regino.
The mother’s complaint against then-Superintendent Kelly Staley argued that the policy essentially keeps social transitioning of a student secret from their parents while the school district enables that transitioning. That infringed on her constitutional rights, she argued, because it causes school personnel to transition her children without her consent or knowledge.
“CUSD appreciates the patience of our community throughout this process,” the school district said in response to the ruling. “The court’s decision to dismiss this case allows us to dedicate staff time and financial resources to academic support and student success in our district. Education is a partnership, and we remain committed to strengthening our programs in collaboration with our families and community.”
Subscribe to our free newsletters
Our weekly newsletter Closing Arguments offers the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world, while the monthly Under the Lights dishes the legal dirt from Hollywood, sports, Big Tech and the arts.


