Join Us in Protecting Parental Rights
Conejo Valley Unified School District Is Being Sued For Illegally Providing Minors With Inappropriate “Gender Affirming” Surveys, Medically and Age-Inappropriate Curriculum, Without Proper Parent Notification
DIVISION SIX Oral Argument, Wednesday, October 9, 2024
Wednesday, October 9, 2024 at 1:30 p.m.
Calendar 1:30 p.m.
On Friday, November 4th, 2022, plaintiffs Steven Schneider and Carrie Burgert, filed a lawsuit against Conejo Valley School District for declaratory and injunctive relief, and petition for writ of mandate against the unconstitutional and illegal actions of the district. The Plaintiffs are represented by Attorney John Howard and Attorney Scott J. Street of JW Howard/ Attorneys, Ltd.
The complaint states the following
“The District has a clear and present duty to provide health/sex education that complies with California law. Instead, the District decided—in an arbitrary and irrational manner— to provide an education that is not age appropriate, medically accurate and free of bias. In so doing, it violated both its ministerial and discretionary duties.”
“These actions are unlawful. Schools have an obligation to teach health and sex education to kids. They do not have the right to teach kids about woke political issues that are, at best, medically unsettled and certainly not age appropriate. And, regardless of what school boards want to teach, they must respect the fundamental right that parents have to control their kids’ upbringing. Our children may be our future, but it is their parents’ right and responsibility to raise them.”
The Protection of the Educational Rights of Kids (PERK), is a non-partisan, non-profit that advocates for civil rights and freedoms, with particular focus on protecting children. PERK protects parental rights and represents tens of thousands of parents and children across the state. PERK is supporting this lawsuit, and many others, and released the following statement:
Transitioning a child’s gender, promoting gender affirming treatment, and sexually explicit curriculum to minors without parent’s knowledge or proper consent is illegal. School Districts are clearly violating the law by providing minors with inappropriate “gender affirming” surveys and “gender affirming treatments” while withholding this from parents. These, so called, “Support Plans,” remove the most important and vital protection children have, the parent. This issue is getting national attention as the practice is increasing to give children puberty blockers to alter their gender.
This is not an LGBTQ issue. This is about the children. Children are minors. They are not equipped to make decisions of this nature without their parents. They should not be manipulated to make life altering medical treatments without their parents’ knowledge and consent. These choices are for adults to make, not minors. This is also about parents being the sole protectors and guardian of their child’s body, development, and mind.
The fundamental questions to ask are this: “Do you believe the government and/or school should be able to transition what gender your child is using puberty blockers and gender reassignment surgeries disguised as “support plans” without parental knowledge or consent?” Do you believe a child is capable of making a body altering, health decision, and treatment that’s irreversible, with consequences beyond their capacity as minors to even comprehend?
“Appellants are not challenging any portions of the Education Code. They agree with the law’s requirement that sex ed curriculum be medically accurate, age appropriate, and free of bias. They just contend that the District’s curriculum does not satisfy those requirements and, thus, that the District is not giving students the sex education the law requires.”