On September 29, Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law SB 107 making California a “sanctuary state” for the provision of “gender-affirming care” for children and teens experiencing gender dysphoria. The new law offers protection for a wide range of “care,” including prescriptions for sex hormones, puberty blockers, and life-changing gender transition surgeries. Newsom openly welcomed children and families from states that restrict or prohibit such procedures for minors.

The Daily Caller News Foundation reported that the bill’s sponsor, California Democrat Senator Scott Wiener, bragged that the new law will “offer refuge to trans kids and their families if they’re being criminalized in their home states.” He continued: “States like Texas and Alabama are seeking to tear these families apart. California won’t be party to it. We have your backs.”

But Newsom and Wiener may be on shaky legal ground despite the rhetoric. California Family Council (CFC) President Jonathan Keller issued a statement charging that “SB 107 endangers every young person in the nation who experiences gender dysphoria. By signing this extreme bill, Gavin Newsom is telling all parents across the country that he knows what’s best for their children. Mothers and fathers in every state should demand their elected representatives push back against this unconstitutional assault on parental rights. Governors and legislators must defend their citizens from this out-of-control government in Sacramento.”

The CFC pointed out that while the law is being characterized as “a bill to make California a safe haven for parents who want to transition their children medically but are forbidden to by their home states, Newsom, Wiener, and the mainstream media are ignoring the section of the bill that enables children to be kidnapped and enticed to the state against their parents’ wishes and against the court custody determinations and laws of other states.”

In other words, the official position in typical far-left California fashion is that the new law permits the state to “protect” beleaguered families of trans kids trapped in restrictive red states. The CFC, however, charges that the law empowers California courts “to remove out-of-state children from their parent’s custody if those children come to California because they can’t get sterilizing transgender drugs and mutilating surgeries in their home states or because their parents object to these experimental treatments for gender dysphoria.”

Text of SB 107

Alliance Defending Freedom, a nonprofit legal organization that advocates for religious liberty, free speech, and pro-family issues, performed a legal analysis of SB 107 in August and found it fraught with danger for parental rights. Examples include:

• SEC. 5. Section 3424 of the Family Code is amended by the new law to include giving California courts temporary “emergency” jurisdiction of a child present in the state who “has been unable to obtain gender-affirming health care or gender-affirming mental health care, as defined by Section 16010.2 of the Welfare and Institutions Code.”


• SEC. 7. Section 3428 of the Family Code, as summarized by the non-partisan Legislative Counsel’s Digest was amended to enable SB 107 to “additionally prohibit a court from considering the taking or retention of a child from a person who has legal custody of the child, if the taking or retention was for obtaining gender-affirming health care or mental health care.”

Even the Los Angeles Times concedes that the new law may be on less than solid constitutional ground. The Times wrote on September 29: “Last-minute amendments to the bill include a severability clause because ‘it is unclear whether this bill will run afoul of the Constitution,’ according to a legislative analysis of the measure. Severability allows parts of a law to remain in effect even if other provisions are struck down.”

State legislatures taking action

On September 20, Bloomberglaw.com reported in its Health Law & Business section that “at least 40” bills have been introduced in approximately 24 states that are similar to the Alabama law prohibiting the prescription of puberty blockers and hormone therapy to minors under the potential penalty of felony charges. Although a federal judge has issued an injunction against Alabama’s medication ban, and an Arkansas law has suffered a similar fate, the push to limit such destructive and often irreversible treatments is moving forward in many states across the country.

While mainstream media articles often blame “conservative legislators” as though they operate in a vacuum without input from constituents, the reality is that more and more parents and citizens are demanding an end to the radical transgender agenda.

According to Bloomberg, a Georgia legislative proposal would penalize doctors who prescribe puberty blockers to minors with prison sentences of up to 10 years, and another in North Carolina “would fine physicians $1,000 per occurrence for doing the same.” A bill introduced in Mississippi would limit health insurance coverage for so-called “transgender health-care services.”

Predictably, the Bloomberglaw.com article favors the LGBTQ position, but it also demonstrates the extent of the nationwide legislative efforts that reflect the increasingly evident and widespread parental outrage.

Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt publicly decried SB 107 before Newsom signed it, saying: “We certainly don’t need leaders passing laws specifically designed to undermine parents. Particularly egregious is a bill on Governor Newsom’s desk that would allow for young children with gender dysphoria in other states to come to California to undergo life-changing procedures without their parents’ consent... Imagine your young son or daughter, a minor, running away from home seeking life-altering medicine or surgery, and some government not only enables your child, but keeps them from their parents. This is simply wrong, we know it inherently, and Americans agree with that. Parents should be in charge of their children, not politicians in California or Washington, DC.”

Stitt made his comments in conjunction with a letter signed by more than 45 local and national organizations asking the governor of California to veto the bill, a request he obviously ignored. In Florida, Governor Ron DeSantis is pushing for a ban on child “sex changes”, citing a report by the state’s Agency for Health Care Administration that shows there is insufficient research to determine whether such procedures are either safe or effective.

The battle lines appear to be drawn throughout the nation, but perhaps SB 107 will be ruled unconstitutional before a full-scale war breaks out.

Want to be notified of new Education Reporter content?
Your information will NOT be sold or shared and will ONLY be used to notify you of new content.
Click Here

Return to Home PageEducation Reporter Online - October 2022