A judge has sided with the state of California in the matter of a conservative group that sued over the title and summary Attorney General Rob Bonta assigned to its ballot measure that would strip rights from transgender minors.
As the Bay Area Reporter previously reported, Protect Kids California is gathering signatures for a ballot measure that would ban trans minors from receiving gender-affirming care; ban trans girls from female competitive sports, locker rooms and bathrooms; and require public schools to disclose students' gender identities to parents if they say they are different than their sex at birth.
Protect Kids California has until May 28 to collect some 550,000 valid signatures in order to place the measure before state voters on the November 5 ballot. Most LGBTQ leaders doubt it will be successful in reaching that threshold.
In preparing a ballot title and summary for the measure, Bonta titled it "Restricts Rights of Transgender Youth." It prompted the Liberty Justice Center to file a lawsuit February 13 in Sacramento County Superior Court on behalf of Protect Kids California that alleged Bonta's personal beliefs led to a biased title and summary. Therefore, the center contended the ballot measure proponents should be given 180 additional days for signature gathering without discounting signatures already collected.
"Respondent [Bonta] has demonstrated that he personally, and in his official capacity, is opposed to any kind of notification by a public school to a parent or guardian that his or her child is exhibiting signs of gender dysphoria when the child asks the school to publicly treat him or her as the opposite sex with a new name or pronouns, and to allow the child to use the sex-segregated facilities of the opposite sex," claimed the groups in their lawsuit.
But a Sacramento Superior Court judge sided with Bonta in a ruling that was first issued tentatively April 19 and was made final April 22. Judge Stephen Acquisto ruled that Bonta's title and summary are accurate.
"Under current law, minor students have express statutory rights with respect to their gender identity," Acquisto stated. "A substantial portion of the proposed measure is dedicated to eliminating or restricting these statutory rights. ... The proposed measure would eliminate express statutory rights and place a condition of parental consent on accommodations that are currently available without such condition.
"The proposed measure objectively 'restricts rights' of transgender youth by preventing the exercise of their existing rights. 'Restricts rights of transgender youth' is an accurate and impartial description of the proposed measure," Acquisto added.
The attorney general's office has some leeway when it comes to determining ballot titles, the judge noted.
Bonta is "afforded 'considerable latitude' in preparing a title and summary," Acquisto ruled.
He found, "The court's task is not to decide what language best captures the essence of the proposed measure, but to decide whether the language chosen by the Attorney General is 'untrue, misleading, or argumentative.' The Court finds that the Attorney General's use of the term 'restricts rights' does not render the title and summary untrue, misleading, or argumentative."
A spokesperson for Bonta stated April 23, "We are pleased with the court's decision to uphold the Attorney General's fair and accurate title and summary for this measure."
In an April 19 statement posted to its Facebook page, the Liberty Justice Center said it was "evaluating next steps" in light of the judge's decision.
"While we are disappointed that the court precluded evidence establishing AG Bonta's bias, we appreciate that the matter has been taken under submission by the judge," stated center officials.
In a statement provided to the B.A.R. on April 24, after news that the decision had been made permanent, Protect Kids California attorney Nicole Pearson stated, "The mental gymnastics used to justify this prejudicial title and summary are not only an egregious abuse of discretion that entitles our clients to an appeal, but a chilling interpretation of law that jeopardizes the very foundation of our constitutional republic. We are reviewing our options for an appeal of these clear errors and will announce a decision shortly."
Tony Hoang, a gay man who is the executive director of statewide LGBTQ advocacy organization Equality California, stated to the B.A.R. that "we are pleased with the judge's ruling."
"California should be a safe and welcoming place for everyone, which is why we have longstanding laws in effect that protect and preserve the rights of LGBTQ+ youth and their families," Hoang stated. "This proposed initiative seeks to undo these critical protections and make our schools and communities less safe for all youth."
Politico's California Playbook newsletter reported last month that the Protect Kids California measure is struggling. "The campaign has so far collected less than a fifth of what it would need to qualify for the ballot," Politico reported. "It does not appear on track to meet a May 28 deadline."
Updated, 4/23/24: This article was updated with comments from Equality California.
Updated 4/24/24: This article has been updated with comments from Protect Kids California's attorney.
Never miss a story! Keep up to date on the latest news, arts, politics, entertainment, and nightlife.
Sign up for the Bay Area Reporter's free weekday email newsletter. You'll receive our newsletters and special offers from our community partners.
Support California's largest LGBTQ newsroom. Your one-time, monthly, or annual contribution advocates for LGBTQ communities. Amplify a trusted voice providing news, information, and cultural coverage to all members of our community, regardless of their ability to pay -- Donate today!