The nation’s highest court on Monday refused to consider a legal challenge brought by Massachusetts parents who claimed their local school district violated their constitutional rights by accommodating their child’s gender identity without parental notification.
The justices dismissed an appeal from Stephen Foote and Marissa Silvestri, whose lawsuit was previously rejected by lower courts. The couple had sued after officials at Baird Middle School in Ludlow honored their 11-year-old’s request to use different names and pronouns at school while continuing to use the child’s birth name when speaking with parents.
The parents argued that school staff promoted what they called “gender ideology” among students without parental knowledge, leading their child, identified in court documents as “B.F.,” to begin questioning their gender identity and ultimately identify as genderqueer.
In their legal filing, Foote and Silvestri contended that school officials violated their 14th Amendment due process rights, which have historically protected parents’ fundamental authority to guide their children’s upbringing and care decisions.
The couple described their opposition to what they termed “so-called gender transition” as morally-based rather than religiously motivated. Their case was backed by Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative Christian advocacy organization.
A federal district judge dismissed their lawsuit in 2022, and the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston confirmed that ruling in 2025. The appeals court determined the parents failed to demonstrate that their parental rights had been adequately compromised, particularly regarding medical care decisions for their child.
The appellate court stated it was “unconvinced that merely alleging Ludlow’s use of gender-affirming pronouns or a gender-affirming name suffices to state a claim that the school provided medical treatment to the student.”
According to the 1st Circuit’s decision, allowing students to control whether schools inform parents about their gender identity enables children to “express their identity without worrying about parental backlash.” The court emphasized that this approach doesn’t force students to hide information or restrict parents’ authority outside school grounds.
“Parents remain free to strive to mold their child according to the parents’ own beliefs,” the 1st Circuit concluded.
This decision follows the Supreme Court’s March 2 action blocking similar California policies that would restrict schools from sharing students’ gender identity information with parents without student consent.
Similar conflicts regarding transgender student privacy and support are occurring nationwide. The high court previously rejected comparable cases from Wisconsin and Maryland in 2024.
The Supreme Court, which maintains a 6-3 conservative majority, continues to address transgender rights issues amid increased restrictions from the Trump administration and Republican-controlled states. In June 2025, the court upheld Tennessee’s ban on gender-affirming medical treatment for transgender minors, and a decision remains pending on state laws prohibiting transgender athletes from competing on female sports teams.
