A San Bernardino County judge has declined to lift an injunction that blocks Chino Valley Unified School District’s original parent-notification policy. Judge Michael Sachs rejected the district’s motion Tuesday, the Daily Bulletin reported.
What remains allowed
The ruling leaves some records-related notifications available. Based on the Daily Bulletin’s account, schools may notify parents about a change to a child’s records when the parents ask about the change or object to not receiving notice. The district’s separate records-notification policy, adopted after the original policy was challenged, remains in effect, the outlet reported.
That limited exception is distinct from the policy adopted in 2023. The original policy would have required notice within days after employees learned that a student sought a different name or pronouns, access to facilities or sports programs, or a change to school records. Chino Valley was the first California district to adopt such a policy, according to the San Gabriel Valley Tribune.
Why the original policy was blocked
What official surveys measure
For broader context on student well-being and school climate, the California Department of Education says the anonymous, confidential California Healthy Kids Survey measures school climate and safety, student wellness and youth resiliency among students in grades five, seven, nine and eleven, according to the department.
Attorney General Rob Bonta’s office sued Chino Valley in August 2023, arguing that the policy discriminated against transgender students and violated state protections. The policy required notice within three days when employees learned that a student sought treatment as a gender different from the one on official records, according to KQED.
Sachs issued a preliminary injunction later that year. His ruling treated the provisions involving gender identity and related accommodations as discriminatory and unlawful, while finding the records provision neutral because it applied to students generally. In September 2024, he permanently blocked the original policy. The California School Boards Association’s legal summary says the court nevertheless found that the records-notification provision did not violate equal-protection rights and that, in the circumstances before it, minor students did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy from their parents in the disclosed information. The injunction limits Chino Valley’s ability to restore the policy in its original form, according to the association’s summary.
The district’s attempted revival
After the 2023 injunction, Chino Valley removed gender-specific language and adopted a broader records-notification policy. In May 2026, the California Justice Center and Advocates for Faith & Freedom filed the motion for the district that sought to dissolve the injunction and revive the original policy, according to the Daily Bulletin. Sachs’s latest ruling rejected that request.
The district maintains that parents should receive notice without having to ask, Emily Rae of the California Justice Center said, according to the Daily Bulletin. Rae said the district was evaluating its options after the written ruling, and the district had not decided whether to appeal. The Attorney General’s office told the outlet it was pleased with the decision and remains committed to safe, inclusive schools while recognizing parents’ role. ACLU of Southern California attorney Christine Parker said the judge correctly kept blanket disclosure requirements unlawful, the Daily Bulletin reported.
State and federal backdrop
California’s legal framework changed after the district adopted its original policy. Assembly Bill 1955 bars school employees from being required to disclose information about a student’s gender or sexual orientation unless another law requires it. State officials have said the measure does not prevent staff from discussing gender identity with parents or parents from viewing written records; it prevents schools from requiring employees to initiate that disclosure, according to the CalMatters account and the California School Boards Association.
The U.S. Department of Education has opened an investigation into the California Department of Education over whether practices related to AB 1955 violate the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act. The department alleges that schools could be socially transitioning children while withholding information from parents, according to the Department of Education and EdSource.
Other districts took different paths
Chino Valley’s policy influenced debates or actions in Temecula Valley, Murrieta Valley, Orange Unified and Redlands, according to KQED’s earlier reporting and later local coverage. Temecula Valley’s board rescinded one policy in December 2024 after an administrative law judge found that the district had not properly negotiated it with its union. The board later adopted a policy that sends an automated message when a student changes school records, according to Atkinson, Andelson, Loya, Ruud & Romo.
Redlands Unified’s board voted 3-2 on Aug. 11, 2026, to remove a similar proposal from its meeting agenda while officials sought additional legal review, the Redlands Daily Facts reported. The proposal would have required employees to notify parents within three days after learning that a student requested a school-record change.
