The California Education Code’s gender identity rules for schools prohibit discrimination based on gender identity and gender expression, require schools to let students use facilities and join activities matching their gender identity, and require staff to use students’ chosen names and pronouns. One major piece of that framework — keeping a student’s gender identity private from parents — has been blocked by the U.S. Supreme Court’s March 2026 order in Mirabelli v. Bonta, at least for the families in that case, and the reasoning suggests broader reach is coming.
What the Education Code Protects
Education Code Section 220 bars discrimination based on gender identity and gender expression in any program or activity run by an educational institution that receives state financial assistance.1California Legislative Information. California Code EDC 220 – Prohibition of Discrimination California’s Penal Code defines “gender” broadly, covering gender identity and gender-related appearance and behavior whether or not they match stereotypes associated with a person’s sex assigned at birth.2California Safe Schools Coalition. About The California Student Safety And Violence Prevention Act of 2000 Harassment, bullying, and exclusion of students on that basis are unlawful in California public schools.
Facilities, Sports, and Activities
Education Code Section 221.5(f), added by Assembly Bill 1266 and effective January 1, 2014, states that students must be permitted to participate in sex-segregated school programs, activities, athletic teams, and competitions, and to use facilities consistent with their gender identity, regardless of the gender listed on school records.3California Legislative Information. California Code EDC 221.54California Legislative Information. California Assembly Bill 1266 – Pupil Rights: Sex-segregated School Programs and Activities
In practice, a student who identifies as female can use the girls’ restroom and locker room and try out for girls’ teams, even if enrollment paperwork says male. Schools cannot require medical documentation, a legal name change, or any other precondition before honoring a student’s gender identity for facility access or activity participation. The law has faced repeated challenges and California courts have consistently upheld it.
Names, Pronouns, and Updating Student Records
California schools are required to address students by names and pronouns consistent with their gender identity, even without a formal legal name change. Intentional and repeated misgendering by school staff falls under the gender identity discrimination banned by Section 220. The California Civil Rights Department has stated that “California law prohibits intentional misgendering” and has pursued enforcement on that basis.5California Civil Rights Department. Civil Rights Department Settles Gender Identity Investigation
Education Code Section 49070 governs updating a student’s name and gender in school files. When a parent or guardian requests the change, the school must create a new document in the student’s record showing the corrected information, the date of the request, which records were updated, and what documentation (if any) was provided. The parent does not have to provide proof of a legal name or gender change as a condition of the update. The document created during this process must be kept confidentially and retained indefinitely.6California Legislative Information. California Code EDC 49070
Records that get updated include campus identification cards, class rosters, and similar school-generated documents. For students who have already graduated, schools can reissue transcripts and comparable records with updated information, though the process varies by district.
Parental Notification After Mirabelli
This is where the rules are actively shifting, and it is the part of the framework most likely to change again in the next year.
In July 2024, Governor Newsom signed Assembly Bill 1955, the SAFETY Act, which prohibited school districts from adopting policies that required staff to notify parents when a student disclosed a transgender identity or asked to be called by a different name or pronouns at school. Several districts had adopted or been considering mandatory notification policies, and AB 1955 was designed to block them statewide.
Parents then challenged California’s broader nondisclosure approach in Mirabelli v. Bonta. A federal district court granted a permanent injunction in December 2025, finding the policies violated parents’ Fourteenth Amendment right to direct their children’s upbringing. The Ninth Circuit stayed that injunction, but on March 2, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court vacated the stay in a 6-3 decision, reinstating the district court’s injunction as to the parent plaintiffs.7Justia. Mirabelli v Bonta, 607 US ___ (2026)
Under the Supreme Court’s order, at least for the plaintiffs in the case, schools cannot conceal information about a child’s gender presentation or social transitioning from parents, and schools must follow parents’ directions regarding their child’s names and pronouns. The Court said “gender dysphoria is a condition that has an important bearing on a child’s mental health” and that California’s approach “conceal[s] that information from parents.”7Justia. Mirabelli v Bonta, 607 US ___ (2026)
The full scope is still developing. The Court noted the parents “must continue to litigate in the Ninth Circuit, and if necessary, this Court,” meaning the injunction could be modified or expanded as the case proceeds. AB 1955 itself was not directly at issue in Mirabelli, though it faces separate legal challenges. For families outside the injunction, California’s statutory framework still stands on paper, but any school that withholds gender identity information from parents does so under legal risk that did not exist before 2026.
The result is a real conflict for administrators. State law still says respect student privacy on gender identity. Federal courts say parents have a constitutional right to know. Districts should expect updated guidance from the California Department of Education, and in the meantime staff are working under obligations that pull in opposite directions.
Privacy of Student Records Generally
Setting aside the parent-notification fight, California’s baseline student record privacy rules remain in effect. Education Code Section 49076 prohibits school districts from releasing student records to any person without written parental consent or a court order, with limited exceptions.8California Legislative Information. California Code EDC 49076 The statute does not specifically mention transgender or nonbinary status, but records reflecting a student’s gender identity history are student records and fall under this protection.
The federal Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) adds another layer, generally requiring written consent before a school discloses personally identifiable information from student education records, with narrow exceptions for directory information, health emergencies, and transfers between schools.9Student Privacy Policy Office. 34 CFR Part 99 – Family Educational Rights and Privacy Staff who share a student’s gender identity information with unauthorized third parties risk violating both state and federal privacy law.
One distinction matters here: FERPA gives parents the right to access their own child’s education records. Both FERPA and the Education Code privacy rules were designed primarily to prevent disclosure to outsiders, not to withhold information from parents of minor students. That is part of why California’s nondisclosure approach was legally vulnerable in Mirabelli.
Title IX No Longer Backstops the State Rules
In April 2024, the U.S. Department of Education issued a Final Rule expanding Title IX’s definition of sex discrimination to include gender identity and gender expression. In January 2025, a federal court in Tennessee v. Cardona vacated the entire Final Rule nationwide, finding that the Department exceeded its authority. Title IX has reverted to its pre-2024 regulations, and there is currently no federal requirement that schools treat gender identity as a protected category under Title IX. In California, Sections 220 and 221.5 carry the weight federal law no longer does.
How to File a Complaint
The primary enforcement path under California law is the Uniform Complaint Procedures (UCP). Any person can file a written complaint with their school district alleging a violation of state or federal law, including gender identity discrimination.10Cornell Law Institute. California Code of Regulations Title 5 Section 4600
Once filed, the district must investigate and issue a written decision within 60 days. That deadline can only be extended with the complainant’s written agreement. The decision has to include findings of fact, a determination of whether the district violated the law, and, if the complaint has merit, corrective actions with a remedy for affected students and parents.11Legal Information Institute. California Code of Regulations Title 5 Section 4631 A complainant unsatisfied with the district’s decision can file a written appeal with the California Department of Education within 30 days of receiving the investigation report.12Legal Information Institute. California Code of Regulations Title 5 Section 4632
The California Civil Rights Department also investigates discrimination complaints, but its primary jurisdiction runs through statutes like the Fair Employment and Housing Act and the Unruh Civil Rights Act, and a California Supreme Court decision has held that public schools are not “business establishments” subject to the Unruh Act. Students pursuing legal claims against public schools generally rely on Education Code violations and constitutional equal protection arguments. The U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights still accepts Title IX complaints, but given the vacatur of the 2024 Final Rule, its current position on gender identity claims is uncertain.
What Non-Compliance Costs a District or Employee
The California Department of Education can investigate complaints and order corrective action. If a district refuses to comply, the CDE can withhold state funding, which gives the mechanism real force.
Lawsuits are another route. While the Unruh Act does not apply to public schools, students can bring claims under the California Constitution’s equal protection clause and under the Education Code itself. Successful cases can produce injunctions requiring policy changes, compensatory damages, and court-ordered staff training.
Individual employees face professional consequences. Education Code Section 44421 authorizes the Commission on Teacher Credentialing to privately admonish, publicly reprove, revoke, or suspend the credential of an educator for “immoral or unprofessional conduct” or for “persistent defiance of, and refusal to obey, the laws regulating the duties of persons serving in the public school system.”13California Legislative Information. California Code EDC 44421 Deliberately and repeatedly violating anti-discrimination laws could fall under either ground. Revocation remains in effect unless the Commission reinstates the credential.14Commission on Teacher Credentialing. What Are Commission and Adverse Actions
The Mirabelli ruling complicates all of this. A school employee who follows California law by keeping a student’s gender identity private from parents could now face a federal court injunction claim from those parents. An employee who discloses the information to parents without the student’s consent could face a state-law complaint. Until the courts finish sorting out Mirabelli and the related challenges to AB 1955, districts that have not updated their policies and training to account for this conflict are exposed on one side or the other.