firstthings.com
2026-03-31
Two weeks ago, the U.S. Supreme Court intervened in Mirabelli v. Bonta, restoring a lower-court injunction that blocks California from enforcing policies requiring school employees to conceal a child's gender transition from parents. The ruling reinforced a principle that has appeared again and again in American constitutional law: The parent-child relationship occupies a privileged position above and beyond the interventions of outside adults and institutions.
That idea has deep roots. A century ago, the Supreme Court declared in Meyer v. Nebraska (1923) that parents possess the liberty to direct their children's education and upbringing. In Pierce v. Society of Sisters (1925), the Court reaffirmed that "the child is not the mere creature of the State." And in Troxel v. Granville (2000), it once again recognized parental authority as a fundamental liberty interest. These cases rest on the common premise that the state does not create the parent-child relationship. It merely recognizes and protects a relationship that already exists.
Yet even as courts are reaffirming this principle, American family law is erasing the relationship those rights were meant to protect.