Court battle over policies on transgender students leads to ruling — and repeal
After an appellate panel affirmed that schools don't have to follow state guidance on transgender students, the Middletown school board voted on Feb. 13, 2025, to repeal their policy. (Stock photo)
New Jersey's transgender community celebrated earlier this week after an appellate panel upheld a lower court order saying school districts cannot require staff to alert parents if a student changes their gender identity at school.
But some districts also declared victory, zeroing in on a few lines in a pair of rulings issued Monday that confirmed school officials also don't have to follow state guidance issued in 2018 directing districts to accept a student's change in gender identity without notifying parents.
One district wasted no time in spiking the football. Middletown Township's school board held a special meeting Thursday night with just one thing on the agenda — abolishing the 'anti-parent policy,' as board President Frank Capone put it, that board members adopted in 2019 to comply with the state's 2018 guidance, known as Policy 5756.
In a meeting that lasted barely three minutes, the board repealed the policy, with no public comment, just one no vote, and a brief speech by Capone.
'Let this outcome send a powerful message to Governor Murphy and Attorney General Platkin: It's time to stop using our children as pawns in political games. Middletown will not accept the abuse,' he said. 'This vote to rescind Policy 5756 will guarantee no child faces individual discrimination, and every parent in this district will remain actively involved in their child's education with complete transparency in Middletown.'
The rulings come as the Trump administration works to roll back transgender students' rights and protections. Since taking office last month, President Donald Trump has banned gender-affirming care for transgender youth, barred transgender athletes from girls' and women's sports, and directed federal education officials to erase records set by transgender athletes.
The court fight in New Jersey started nearly two years ago, when Attorney General Matt Platkin first sought and secured judicial orders blocking parental notification policies in Middletown, Marlboro, Manalapan, and Hanover school districts that he said violated protections for transgender students under the state's Law Against Discrimination.
In Monday's rulings, a three-judge appellate panel upheld the preliminary injunctions, affirming lower court rulings that backed Platkin.
The districts' parental notification policies would subject transgender students to disparate treatment and possible mental health issues, backlash from families, housing instability, and other harms, in violation of the Law Against Discrimination, the judges agreed. They also would harm school staff by subjecting them to discipline if they don't comply with disclosure requirements, the judges said.
While parents have the right to control their child's upbringing, case law 'has not extended that right to require schools to affirmatively provide parents with information,' the judges wrote.
Parents can still access their children's student records, and the injunctions do 'not prevent students from voluntarily sharing information about their gender identity or expression with their parents,' they added.
But the judges noted the injunctions were meant to be temporary until the state's Division of Civil Rights ultimately decides the matter.
That agency has made no substantive progress on the issue since lower courts ordered the injunctions in 2023, the judges wrote. If it doesn't make 'reasonable progress soon,' they added, district officials can petition the court to lift or modify the injunctions.
Attorney Michael J. Gross, who represents Marlboro, saw that as a win.
'The Division of Civil Rights is not doing anything in this case, and they've sat on it for more than 18 months,' Gross said. 'So we were happy to see that the Appellate Division panel unanimously agreed that the Division of Civil Rights hasn't done what they were supposed to do.'
Capone seconded that sentiment Thursday night.
'For the past 18 months, we have dealt with an attorney general who misused his authority to convert a temporary injunction into a permanent one,' he said.
Platkin's office, which oversees the division, declined to comment on that delay.
Parental notification supporters, including Sen. Declan O'Scanlon (R-Monmouth), complained that the end result of the court battle and Monday's rulings is 'no policy at all … a net negative for trans kids.'
But Christian Fuscarino, who heads Garden State Equality, said the districts essentially forced the state to take them to court to ensure transgender students get the protections the law requires. Fuscarino's group filed briefs supporting the state's case.
'We are forced into this position when school districts decide to pass policies that could potentially out them to families that may kick them out of their homes,' Fuscarino said. 'LGBTQ youth represent 40% of the entire youth homeless population. To suggest that all young LGBTQ people grow up in homes that are loving and affirming is ignoring that difficult statistic.'
Platkin said in a statement that the state agrees that parents should be involved in making important decisions about their children. But the courts rightly decreed that schools cannot have a blanket policy that unfairly forces educators to choose between endangering a vulnerable child's safety and well-being if they notify parents of gender identity changes and losing their job if they don't, Platkin said.
'All our lawsuits have sought to do is to reinstate the status quo that has existed for years without controversy — one that was put in place by Gov. Chris Christie and that respects the need for parents to be informed about their children while safeguarding the civil rights of all students,' he said, referring to the 2017 law that tasked the state Department of Education with issuing guidance on transgender students.
Robert Kim heads the Education Law Center, which has advocated against parental notification policies. He found the rulings notable in light of the Trump administration's actions on this front.
'When you have a federal government that is hell-bent on targeting transgender students for not only disfavorable treatment, but for non-recognition completely, then it's all the more important to rely on the parallel system of government in our country, which is the state governments and the state courts,' Kim said.
'It's a positive development that both the executive and judicial branches of New Jersey can signal that they have independent authority to protect students from discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, given what's happened over the last 23 days out of Washington,' Kim added.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
23-05-2025
- Yahoo
Bill allowing trans people to be kept out of bathrooms, locker rooms heads to NH governor's desk
Supporters of transgender rights gather at the Legislative Office Building in Concord on Feb. 19, 2025. (Photo by William Skipworth/New Hampshire Bulletin) A bill that would eliminate certain transgender protections established by a 2018 anti-discrimination law in New Hampshire was approved by the state Senate Thursday and now heads to Gov. Kelly Ayotte's desk. If it becomes law, House Bill 148, which was sponsored by Wilton Republican Rep. Jim Kofalt, will allow businesses and organizations in New Hampshire to classify certain services, such as locker rooms and restrooms, by biological sex. It would also permit schools and organized sports teams in the state to keep transgender athletes off teams that are consistent with their gender identity. It would allow prisons, mental health facilities, and juvenile detention centers to place transgender people with members of their at-birth sex even if they ask to be placed according to the gender they identify with. The bill doesn't require any of these things, but it allows whoever owns the restrooms, administers the sports teams, or runs the prison to do so without facing discrimination charges. This reverses parts of 2018's Law Against Discrimination, which was enacted to protect people from discrimination on the basis of 'age, sex, gender identity, race, creed, color, marital status, familial status, physical or mental disability, or national origin.' The Senate passed the bill, 16-8, along party lines Thursday, with all Republicans voting yes and all Democrats voting no. The House passed the legislation, 201-166, in March. Only two Democratic House members, Reps. Jonah Wheeler and Peter Leishman, both of Peterborough, voted in favor. Ayotte will now have the option to sign the bill into law, veto it, or allow it to become law without her signature. Her predecessor, former Gov. Chris Sununu, was given the same options in 2024 when the House and Senate approved House Bill 396. This year's bill, HB 148, is a word-for-word copy of last year's HB 396. Sununu ultimately vetoed the bill, calling it 'unacceptable,' and saying it 'runs contrary to New Hampshire's Live Free or Die spirit' and 'seeks to solve problems that have not presented themselves,' per his veto message. LGBTQ+ rights supporters sang outside the State House restrooms in protest of the bill during the Senate session Thursday. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
23-05-2025
- Yahoo
Bill allowing trans people to be kept out of bathrooms, locker rooms heads to Ayotte's desk
Supporters of transgender rights gather at the Legislative Office Building in Concord on Feb. 19, 2025. (Photo by William Skipworth/New Hampshire Bulletin) A bill that would eliminate certain transgender protections established by a 2018 anti-discrimination law in New Hampshire was approved by the state Senate Thursday and now heads to Gov. Kelly Ayotte's desk. If it becomes law, House Bill 148, which was sponsored by Wilton Republican Rep. Jim Kofalt, will allow businesses and organizations in New Hampshire to classify certain services, such as locker rooms and restrooms, by biological sex. It would also permit schools and organized sports teams in the state to keep transgender athletes off teams that are consistent with their gender identity. It would allow prisons, mental health facilities, and juvenile detention centers to place transgender people with members of their at-birth sex even if they ask to be placed according to the gender they identify with. The bill doesn't require any of these things, but it allows whoever owns the restrooms, administers the sports teams, or runs the prison to do so without facing discrimination charges. This reverses parts of 2018's Law Against Discrimination, which was enacted to protect people from discrimination on the basis of 'age, sex, gender identity, race, creed, color, marital status, familial status, physical or mental disability, or national origin.' The Senate passed the bill, 16-8, along party lines Thursday, with all Republicans voting yes and all Democrats voting no. The House passed the legislation, 201-166, in March. Only two Democratic House members, Reps. Jonah Wheeler and Peter Leishman, both of Peterborough, voted in favor. Ayotte will now have the option to sign the bill into law, veto it, or allow it to become law without her signature. Her predecessor, former Gov. Chris Sununu, was given the same options in 2024 when the House and Senate approved House Bill 396. This year's bill, HB 148, is a word-for-word copy of last year's HB 396. Sununu ultimately vetoed the bill, calling it 'unacceptable,' and saying it 'runs contrary to New Hampshire's Live Free or Die spirit' and 'seeks to solve problems that have not presented themselves,' per his veto message. LGBTQ+ rights supporters sang outside the State House restrooms in protest of the bill during the Senate session Thursday.
Yahoo
25-04-2025
- Yahoo
Montclair health benefits matter raises questions about Democrat running for governor
As Sean Spiller campaigns for governor, his record as mayor of Montclair has received scant attention. (Illustration by Alex Cochran for New Jersey Monitor/Spiller photo by Dana DiFilippo) There's a years-old scandal involving one of our candidates for governor and no one's talking about it. Well, almost no one. State Sen. Mike Testa brought it up during a recent budget hearing with Attorney General Matt Platkin. Testa, a Cumberland County Republican, asked Platkin why his office prosecuted the GOP former mayor of Wildwood for fraudulently obtaining town health benefits for his part-time city job — New Jersey law says benefits are meant for full-time workers only — yet has not filed similar charges against a Democratic ex-mayor of Montclair and current gubernatorial candidate accused of the same thing. Testa didn't name names, but he meant Sean Spiller, president of statewide teachers union the New Jersey Education Association. You may know him from the tens of thousands of vote-for-Spiller flyers that have been showering the state since the fall. 'That case never reached a criminal court, while the case in Wildwood was presented to the grand jury not once but twice, and has been pursued aggressively. You've recused yourself from the Montclair investigation, which stopped completely dead in its tracks. Why such a disparity between those two cases?' Testa asked Platkin. Platkin mostly declined to answer questions about the Montclair matter since he's recused from it — Platkin lives in Montclair — and deferred questions about it to the unnamed person in his office who was or is handling that investigation. Platkin said he doesn't know its status. I don't know why Spiller's Democratic rivals — there are six Democrats in the race to succeed Gov. Phil Murphy — have not needled Spiller about this particular matter in advance of their June 10 primary. But the Montclair story is worth examining. Spiller won election as the Montclair mayor in May 2020 after serving on the town's council for two terms. The town had recently joined the State Health Benefits Program, which since 2010 has barred part-time employees from receiving health benefits. Montclair's mayor and council members are part-time employees but were given the green light to receive health benefits because a town official said they worked the requisite 35 hours a week, according to allegations raised in court by Padmaja Rao, the town's CFO. Rao alleged in a 2022 whistleblower lawsuit that an outside auditor told her Montclair's officials could not accept health benefits per state law, and when she told other town officials this, she became the victim of harassment. Spiller did not accept most of Montclair's health benefits, but he did sign up for its dental plan and take about $5,000 annually from Montclair taxpayers in exchange for not taking medical benefits, according to Rao's lawyers. The $5,000 waiver is intended to encourage town employees to save taxpayers money by, say, remaining on their spouse's health plan — not to fatten the wallet of its already well-paid mayor. The New Jersey Education Association's IRS filings show Spiller's 2022 salary was $291,289, plus $106,217 in other compensation. Like Testa, Nancy Erika Smith, Rao's attorney, is curious about why the ex-Wildwood mayor was charged with a crime but no one in Montclair was. 'I don't know what the excuse is,' Smith said. Smith noted that Montclair elected officials, including Spiller, signed certifications swearing under oath they worked 35 hours a week so they could qualify for benefits or the $5,000 waiver. Spiller also worked 40 hours a week for the teachers union, per the union's IRS filings, meaning he was clocking 75-hour work weeks. Busy guy! During Spiller's deposition in the Rao case, Smith asked Spiller how long he worked per week, but Spiller cited his Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate himself — and proceeded to plead the fifth more than 400 more times during that deposition. I asked Spiller's campaign if he would chat with me about this. It sent a statement from Spiller trashing Testa's comments to Platkin as 'yet another MAGA fueled diatribe in Trenton' and said his assertions and those by 'an interested attorney have no bearing on the facts.' (Testa's response: 'Thou doth protest too much.') I also asked if Spiller would move to change the law if elected governor to allow part-time public workers like elected officials to collect health benefits. They are denied benefits under a 2010 law, championed by then-Gov. Chris Christie, who said it would lower costs for taxpayers. 'I have always stood for, and run on, Healthcare as a right for everyone and not a privilege,' Spiller's statement says. 'With countless folks and their town and county legal counsel all over the state — including Essex County — working to interpret current law, we need a Governor who will fight for universal Healthcare for every New Jersey resident. And that's exactly what I'll do.' Awfully slippery. The question was about part-time mayors foisting the cost of their health benefits onto taxpayers even if they have full-time jobs that could provide those benefits, and the answer was a progressive call for universal health care. Spiller would fit in well in Trenton. As for Peter Byron, the former Wildwood mayor, he admitted in September that he defrauded the State Health Benefits Program, among other crimes. Prosecutors with the state Attorney General's Office recommended a three-year prison term. Rao settled her whistleblower lawsuit with Montclair last May for $1.25 million. And Spiller declined last year to seek a second term as Montclair's mayor. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX