by Dennis Jamison
Informed Parents of California has supported the Protect Kids of California Act” Ballot Initiative in our newsletter and on our website for quite some time. https://www.ip-ca.org/protect-kids
Our staff has been following the path of the “Protect Kids of California Act” Ballot Initiative, and was not surprised by the re-wording of the title of initiative by Attorney General Rob Bonta. It is likely one of the standard operating procedures of those in government that want to undermine the will of the people. Former Attorneys General were also known for similar word play that derailed the people’s ballot initiatives.
In the most recent instance, the title of the proposed “Protect Kids of California Act,” a ballot measure requiring school staff to notify parents of instances when children ask to have their gender identification changed, Bonta switched the intent of the title when he renamed this initiative the “Restrict Rights of Transgender Youth” initiative. Erin Friday, an attorney, said the language should be changed to use a more impartial word, such as “limit” because the initiatives with titles and summaries including the word “restrict” often fail. Maybe, that is why the backers of the measure sued the Attorney General for his manipulation of the wording and the perception of the initiative.
Friday, a leader with Our Duty, a group of parents and proponents of the measure, sued
Attorney General Bonta for undermining a long-standing right of state citizens to enact laws directly by proposing ballot initiatives, which bypassed th e state legislature. Bonta took the step to rewrite the initiative’s title and summary, although the title seemed slanted in a way to sway the voters through language not in alignment with the intent of the measure designed to protect parent’s rights. Parents’ attorneys assert that this was the intent behind what Bonta did.
The trial proceeded last week over the wording of the “Protect Kids of California Act.” In the hearing in Sacramento Friday, the attorneys from the respective sides debated whether the word “restrict” was a fair depiction of what the proposed measure was intended to accomplish. On that Friday (April 19), Sacramento Superior Court Judge Stephen Acquisto stated that the attorney general’s description of the ballot initiative was accurate. In a tentative ruling, Judge Acquisto wrote: “A substantial portion of the proposed measure is dedicated to eliminating or restricting these statutory rights.” Without much consideration of parents’ rights, Judge Acquisto stated that, “Under current law, minor students have express statutory rights with respect to their gender identity.” As of this writing, a definitive decision has not come forth, but the judge explained he would give the matter further thought before issuing a final decision.
Attorney Friday admitted that the title and summary Bonta focuses on the violation of students’ the rights, but “parents have rights above all others to constitute care and education of their children.”
Informed Parents firmly agrees that every parent has the right, as well as the responsibility, to ensure that their children receive a stable, enriching and meaningful education. Administrators and educators are entrusted to assist parents in such efforts, not to usurp parental responsibility or rights. Every school district is accountable to the parents for the greater good of their kids and the success of the schools.
Informed Parents understood that the “Protect Kids of California Act of 2024” initiative would meet apathy, indifference and outright opposition. To reinforce this point, our newsletter linked to The Federalist article entitled: “How A Ballot Initiative To Save Kids From Trans Madness In California Could Save Them Elsewhere Too.” The author pointed out that “California’s Democrat establishment will do everything it can to stop this,” and referred to Bonta’s word games. Judge Acquisto’s agreement with Bonta’s language reveals a biased judge rubber stamping an obvious manipulation of language and intent of supporting parental rights.
The Federalist explained the purpose of the initiative is to reverse the trend in California of “transitioning” kids, including chemically and surgically sterilizing them.” And, the author is correct in stating the California political establishment would not want this ballot initiative to succeed. But, out of all of the 58 counties in California, little support has been garnered from the Republican lawmakers. And, Erin Friday, a Democrat, revealed that the biggest donors to the “Protect Kids of California Act of 2024” are Democrats. This indicates that it is not a partisan issue – it is a human rights issue – essentially the rights of the parents of schoolchildren.
Another article referenced a poll published by The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty that had released its fifth annual (2023 Religious Freedom Index) on National Religious Freedom Day on January 16. The report revealed that approximately “two-thirds of Americans agree with the notion that parents should be able to opt their kids out of public school teachings they believe are inappropriate or contradictory to their values…” Through numerous organizations across the state and the nation, parents and grandparents and families of faith are taking a stand against the predatory practices of public school employees who see our children as prey in a captive system and not as students in learning environments. Californians are not alone.
Informed Parents is still helping to get the required 546,651 signatures in May. We are strongly encouraging concerned citizens to sign this petition by May 10. We urge all who have not signed the petition to go to our website and carefully follow the instructions: Protect Kids California petition It is one way parents, grandparents and families of faith can fight back against an unresponsive political system. People showing up and speaking up and standing up for their rights have always made a difference in America. It is now our time to take a stand.
