342
submitted 2 years ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta filed a lawsuit Monday against the Chino school district, ordering an end to a policy that requires notifying parents if their children change their gender identity, alleging it is discriminatory and violates civil rights and privacy laws.

The “parental notification” policy, which has been proposed by a handful of conservative-leaning districts in California, puts transgender and gender-nonconforming students in “danger of imminent, irreparable harm” by potentially forcibly “outing” them at home before they’re ready, according to the lawsuit.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] drdiddlybadger@pawb.social 62 points 2 years ago

We don't have time for school districts to be wasting with culture war bullshit anyway. This behavior must be penalized heavily. Petty tyrants can't just force everyone to to live the same way they do.

load more comments (61 replies)
[-] ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

In principle, where should the line be drawn between local and state control in matters like this? On the one hand, I think notification policies are mean-spirited and likely to do real harm. On the other hand, they have the support of the majority in these school districts. If we say that the state ought to override local policy in cases like this, what will we say in cases where a conservative state government is seeking to impose its will on progressive communities (sanctuary cities in states that are cracking down on illegal immigrants, municipalities refusing to enforce drug laws, etc.)?

(The answer is probably "neither side has a principled stance regarding the balance of power between state and local governments so we might as well do everything we can to support specific policies we agree with rather than abstract principles" but IMO it would be nice if there were commonly-accepted principles about this sort of thing.)

[-] Laticauda@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

There was once a time where the majority was fine with segregation. The majority isn't always right, and where they shouldn't be given default control is imo when it affects the quality and safety of the lives of other people. We know for a fact that a policy like this will harm children, there are statistics to back it up.

If a local government was trying to make it legal to lynch minorities, then I don't think there are many people who would argue that the state interfering would be a bad thing. This situation may not be quite as extreme, but it's definitely not harmless either. If the state is seeking to do more direct harm to people, then it's pretty obviously not a good thing. Unfortunately there are a lot of conservatives who just plain like harming people as long as those people don't look like them 😒

[-] SheeEttin@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

The US is structured so that most of the legislation is (or was, anyway) done at the state level, as part of the whole "laboratory of democracy" thing, per the tenth amendment. The federal level is supposed to be pretty weak, mostly just coordinating between states and on international issues. So according to the design of the various levels of government, it's correct that the state can override cities. (And in turn, Congress can override the states, but wasn't supposed to happen that much.)

Of course this hasn't really worked out in practice, with the federal government assuming more responsibilities. And I'm not saying any of this was a good or bad idea. But that's how it was designed.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 28 Aug 2023
342 points (96.5% liked)

News

35849 readers
886 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS