In California, a bitter debate has found its nexus within the partisan politics of a presidential election cycle, and the results could help define the election's outcome.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a new law Monday that bans school districts from requiring staff to tell parents if their child starts changing their gender expression at school.
"There are rare circumstances where forcibly outing a child without their consent is harmful and sometimes outright dangerous," said Tony Hoang, the executive director of Equality California, which pushed for the law.
His group's push came after school districts in the state passed mandatory reporting policies. Hoang calls them "forced outing" policies.
"What these forced outing policies would do is that it removes that consent and the opportunity for a youth to build up that trust and confidence to have these really important conversations with their families when they're ready," he said.
The Liberty Justice Center is suing state leaders, including Newsom, Attorney General Rob Bonta, and State Superintendent Tony Thurmond. The suit alleges the law violates parents' rights to direct their children's care under the 14th Amendment.
"It also violates their First Amendment right to free exercise," said Emily Rae, senior counsel for Liberty Justice Center. "You know, these parents believe that God created man and woman as immutable genders and that if their child is allowed to socially transition outside of their view and without their knowledge, that violates their religion."
RELATED STORY | Biden's Title IX law expanding protections for LGBTQ+ students now blocked in 10 states
Scott Davison is a California parent and legislative affairs director for a group fighting California's new law.
He told Scripps News the fight boils down to whether parents should be aware if their child is suffering from a mental health disorder, which is how Davison regards a change in gender expression. Major medical associations say the science doesn't support that view.
"Europe, you know, decided this a few decades ago and was really leading the way. And they have now gone back, right, and they have now reversed course and said, 'You know what, we think we made a mistake. Now that we've done studies on this, it doesn't appear that we should be affirming these transgender identities.'"
Davison cites European reassessment of what's called the Dutch Protocol, a template for providing gender-affirming care. It's come under recent scrutiny as more studies questioned whether its model of prescribing puberty blockers is the best course for all patients. The scrutiny prompted several European countries to scale back their gender-affirming care for adolescents.
But the California bill has nothing to do with puberty blockers, as it concerns whether school staff should be required to tell parents if their child is using different pronouns at school or asking to go by a different name.
RELATED STORY | Sexual orientation, gender identity can be discussed in Fla. schools
Criticism of the Dutch Protocol also doesn't change the data from more than a dozen studies by which major medical authorities, including the American Medical Association and the American Psychological Association, have concluded being transgender is not a mental disorder and that gender-affirmation can reduce suicidality and depression.
The policy debate, though, comes as the GOP tries to make a play for the LGBTQ+ vote this fall. Former first lady Melania Trump held a fundraiser for Log Cabin Republicans earlier this month, and Trump adviser Richard Grenell saidthe goal is to get 50% of the gay vote for Donald Trump.
A GLAAD poll in January showed Joe Biden with a 53-point advantage over Trump among LGBTQ+ voters. The fight over California's policy could stand in the way of the GOP's attempt to win over some of those voters.
"We believe that Californians believe that our schools should be a place for students to succeed and not be a wedge issue in the culture wars at large," Hoang said.
