New Hampshire's Supreme Court sided with a lower court's ruling.
It says that Manchester School District's protocol did not infringe on a local mother's rights in 2022 when the school did not notify her that her minor child had requested to go by another name at school.
The mother asked the school's faculty to only call the child by his or her birth name and proper pronouns, but the school principal reportedly replied that the staff was "held by the district policy," and that they could not "disclose a student's choice to parents if asked not to."
The mother sued.
A lower court ruled against her, and now, the state supreme court has agreed with that ruling.
Tiffany Justice is co-founder of Moms for Liberty.
She tells AFN in effect that the government needs to stay out of the way when it comes to parents raising their children.
Ruling harmful for children
"Anytime a child is experiencing mental distress or sharing mental distress at school-- let's not make any mistake, that is what gender confusion is-- parents should be a major part of their children's lives. And cutting them out of those important decisions in the child's life is really putting the child at a disadvantage,” Justice said.
It may take a village to raise a child, but it doesn’t take government infringement. The state supreme court made parenting harder for this New Hampshire mother, Justice said.
“Parents don't just have the right to direct the upbringing of their children, but we have a duty, a responsibility, to help guide our children through life. We take that duty and responsibility very seriously. And we do not co-parent with the government,” Justice said.
The New Hampshire Supreme Court said this protocol is not unconstitutional because it does not mandate non-disclosure to families, according to the Daily Caller, but instead, it encourages non-disclosure.
It does not appear the mother will appeal the ruling.
Attorney Rick Lehmann, who represented the mother, told The NH Journal that he and his client “respect the ruling” of the Supreme Court.
“The dissent had better arguments,” Lehmann said. “The court underappreciated the importance of parental rights.”
