On Feb. 13, a federal judge issued a ruling that’s partially favorable to a parent who’s challenging a school district in Pennsylvania that doesn’t inform parents of a gender-transitioning student without the student’s consent.
The Dover Area School District has the parental-notification policy at issue. It’s located in York County and has about 3,200 students from grades K through 12.
In 2022, a child of Michelle Landerer was a student at Dover Middle School. The child informed school personnel he wanted to be referred to as Caleb and with male pronouns. School personnel complied with Caleb’s wishes.
Eventually, Landerer found out about Caleb’s transition from Caleb’s sibling. On April 3, 2024, Landerer filed suit in federal court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, challenging the school district’s notification policy.
Landerer’s 57-page lawsuit alleges multiple violations of federal law by the school district. The lawsuit asserts that parents have a right to oversee their children’s upbringing, including the gender pronouns they use in school.
Moreover, Landerer alleges the mental health of Caleb deteriorated due to alleged mistreatment he received in the school and that school officials were deceptive about the notification policy.
In a 54-page opinion, U.S. District Judge Jennifer P. Wilson dismissed three counts in Landerer’s lawsuit but allowed three other counts to move forward to a possible trial.
Wilson opined that Landerer didn’t have a constitutional right to be notified of Caleb’s gender pronouns. The judge cited case law allowing school districts to withhold such information from parents.
However, Landerer alleges the school district went further than withholding Caleb’s pronouns by actively engaging in “unauthorized counseling” and affirming Caleb’s transition.
For their part, school officials argue they simply accepted Caleb’s request to be addressed as Caleb and referred to with male pronouns. If Caleb had consented, the district would have notified Landerer of his transition, according to defense filings.
The judge rejected Landerer’s claim that the district violated the Americans with Disabilities Act by not providing reasonable accommodations for Caleb. The judge also rejected Landerer’s claim that Caleb and his brother were denied a public education, noting that Landerer withdrew them from the public school voluntarily.
Moreover, Wilson rejected the claim that Landerer’s religious-freedom rights were violated by the notification policy.
Landerer’s three surviving claims include one count of Landerer’s right to direct her child’s medical care, and two counts concerning her right to direct the care, custody and control of her child, according to Wilson’s ruling.
A jury trial has been requested by Landerer. She’s seeking changes in the way the school district handles transitioning students and an unspecified amount in damages.
Ernest Trakas, an attorney for Landerer, issued this statement: “Ms. Landerer’s right to raise and care for her children is sacrosanct. This includes being the primary decision maker on all matters pertaining to her children’s physical and mental health and wellbeing. As the Court correctly found, this right is secured by the 1st, 5th and 14th Amendments of the Constitution. The Dover Area School District’s dismissive attitude toward these rights and its reckless actions with [Caleb] is unacceptable and unconstitutional. Of equal importance and concern is the harm such policies, protocols and directives are wreaking on all minor children attending the Dover Area School District. Child and Parental Rights Campaign is steadfast and unwavering in its commitment to protecting the rights of parents and their minor children.”
Attorneys for the school district had no comment for this story.