Parental rights

Carlos and Jenny Encinas, like most parents, believe that raising their children to become positive, respectful, and productive adults is their primary, God-given responsibility. They take an active role in all their children’s school, church, and social activities, guiding them in accordance with the religious beliefs that are central to their family’s faith.

Traditionally, schools have worked in partnership with parents to ensure children get the most out of the public education system. That partnership is breached, however, when schools directly and without apology ban parents from participating in the education process and making decisions about what is right for their children that are consistent with the family’s religious beliefs.

In May, while attending La Costa Heights Elementary School in Carlsbad, Calif., the Encinases’ son, along with other fifth graders, was subjected to a reading of My Shadow Is Pink, a book that advances gender ideology contrary to the religious beliefs taught in their home. Immediately following the reading, school officials required the Encinases’ son and others to affirm and teach the school district’s views on gender identity to kindergarteners as part of a mentoring program. Together, they were forced to watch a video version of My Shadow Is Pink and then participate in an activity asking the kindergartener to choose a color that “represents” his chosen gender and then chalking his shadow in that color.

The Encinases were never notified about the book and activity and only learned about it when their son recounted the story after school. He was visibly shaken and conflicted that he was forced to become a mouthpiece for a view of sexuality that violated his religious beliefs.

In a recent social media post, a current trustee with the Encinitas Union School District claimed that “parents already have numerous rights and in no way are they excluded from the classroom and their child’s education” but then went on to accuse religious parents of being racist, calling parental rights a “dog-whistle for denying the existence of whole groups of people.” This open hostility was deeply upsetting to the diverse families asking only to opt their children out of a handful of lessons.

When Carlos Encinas contacted the school about the incident to exercise his parental rights, asking for notification in the future when such content would be covered and his son be granted an opt out from the class, he was told that although the school does allow opt outs in many other areas, it refused to grant one here since the subject matter was not taught in health class.

Yet the school district’s handbook allows for a wide range of opt outs from instructional activities, including for “any student with a moral objection to dissecting or otherwise harming or destroying an animal.” Yet, it gives no consideration when a student is forced to engage in an activity that violates his religious beliefs.

The First Amendment takes precedence over the district’s handbook and is clear about the constitutional rights of students and parents that do not cease when a student steps foot onto public school property. For nearly 100 years, the Supreme Court has reaffirmed the “enduring American tradition” of the “rights of parents to direct ‘the religious upbringing’ of their children,” and the school district must heed that tradition.

The Encinases child is not alone. Other students with the same religious beliefs have been forced to speak a message that conflicts with their religious convictions. California state law allows school districts to provide opt outs if they choose, and even requires opt outs in many contexts to respect religious beliefs. In this case, they are choosing not to allow opt outs and attempting to hide behind state law as an excuse for their violation of parents’ First Amendment rights.

Schools should never shame or punish students who have religious beliefs simply because they don’t align with a school district’s classroom content.

The school district should end its clearly unlawful behavior and protect the religious liberty of every student by notifying parents when such material is taught and granting them the ability to opt their children out. It is one sure way the school district can demonstrate respect for parents’ rights and be consistent with the free exercise of their religious beliefs granted in the U.S. Constitution.

Editor’s note: Kayla Toney is associate counsel for First Liberty Institute, which represents the Encinases in a federal lawsuit against the Encinitas Union School District.