The Supreme Court of the United States provides needed clarity over the inherent power of the presidency, the rights reserved to parents.

The Supreme Court Affirms Parental Rights, Rules Against Groomers

Docket number 24-297

Argued Apr 22, 2025

Decided Jun 27, 2025

Opinion written by Justice Alito

In Mahmoud v. Taylor, Justice Alito’s majority opinion held that parents have the authority to opt their children out of LGBTQ-themed lessons being pushed in the schools.

In a 6-3 decision upholding religious liberty and the right of parents to direct their child’s upbringing, the high court came down squarely on the side of parents who asked that they be notified and given a chance to opt their children out of instruction involving sexuality and gender ideology that the parents did not agree with.

More than a legal victory, this confirms what parents across the country have been saying: We didn’t start this culture war, but we’re not going to lose it.

The decision advances CRA’s campaign exposing how schools and institutions are being used to groom children with radical content. By restoring common-sense parental control, the Court has taken another step toward preserving the moral fabric of our nation.

The Supreme Court Upholds Age Verification Laws for Minors

Docket number. 23-1122

Argued January 15, 2025

Decided June 27, 2025

Opinion written by Justice Barrett

In Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton, the Supreme Court affirmed what millions of American parents already know: the internet should not be a free-for-all for pornographers to target our children.

The High Court has affirmed what millions of American parents already knew: the internet should not be a free-for-all for pornographers to target our children. In upholding the Texas age-verification law, the Court sided with the rights of parents, the innocence of children, and the duty of states to uphold moral order.

pornographers to target our children. In upholding Texas’s age-verification law, the Court sided with the rights of parents, the innocence of children, and the duty of states to uphold moral order.

A long-standing constitutional truth has been confirmed once again: states have the authority to protect their people — especially the most vulnerable — from predatory forces online.

The porn industry and its allies tried to hide behind the First Amendment and block this commonsense protection. Thankfully the High Court has rejected this argument and provided every state in the union a green light to do the same.

Leaders across the country should follow the lead of Texas and defend their children. It is high time we restore decency to our families. It is high time our elected officials see to their constitutional duty in this regard.

The Supreme Court Rules Against Rogue Judges

Docket number. 24A884

Constitutional questions cannot help but be of great public interest. And when the questions boil down to the fundamental system of checks and balances under which our government operates? The doctrine of Separation of Powers? This is of national import.

Let's be clear: there can be no greater concern during President Trump’s second term in office than the issue of activist judges in single jurisdiction roles issuing decisions meant to tie the hands of the sitting president, preventing him from implementing policies that he ran on and that a majority of people voted for.

Bottom line: Activist judges will have a harder time issuing unconstitutional “nationwide injunctions” against policies being implemented by President Trump.  

Learn to Campaign for School Board

We continue to seek solid, parent-rights supporting people to serve on our local Santa Clara County school boards. Have you been considering how you might give back to your community? If so, this might be the way!

This virtual training dives deep into the fundamentals of running for school board, offering practical strategies to build a robust support system, raise funds, and connect with voters. With dedicated workshop sessions, you’ll tackle real-time challenges, brainstorm ideas, and refine your campaign approach in a supportive environment.

Moms for Liberty Supports Revoking

NEA's Federal Charter

Per an event which took place on Wednesday July 16^th:

Representative Mark Harris (R-NC) and Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) have announced plans to introduce legislation to revoke the National Education Association’s (NEA) federal charter following public outcry over leaked resolutions criticized as partisan and antisemitic.

Harris stated, “The NEA was created to champion America’s teachers and serve our schools, but it has spiraled into a partisan machine that’s more about radical ideology than education.” He was joined by cosponsor Reps. Mary Miller (R-IL) and Ralph Norman (R-SC), along with Corey DeAngelis, senior fellow at the American Culture Project, and Tina Descovich, co-founder of Moms for Liberty, both vocal supporters of the measure.

Support School Board Trustees

Who Protect Children and Promote Liberty

Oak Grove School District will have three trustee seats coming up for grabs in 2026. Just imagine having that district with a majority of its board members supporting policies that promote parental rights. (One can dream...).

Union School District is looking for a new trustee to fill the seat vacated by Mr. Doug Evans, who has moved out of the district as of May 2^nd 2025. The vacancy for the remainder of Evans' term (June 2025 through Nov. 2026) will be filled by Board appointment. The application period is now open and runs through June 6, 2025 at 4:30 pm. Anyone interested in being considered for the position should submit an application, which can be filled out online at the district's website or delivered in person (or via email) after downloading and printing the application pdf file.

News From Palo Alto Unified School District

Per an article in Palo Alto Online:

District Superintendent Don Austin responded to his complaints at a board meeting Tuesday night [May 13^th], thanking the congressman for what he characterized as an “apology,” regarding the post, which he called “misguided.” 

But Khanna told this publication that he did not, in fact, apologize and stood by his criticism.

“I had a call with Palo Alto Superintendent Austin at his request, and I admire his leadership,” Khanna, D-17th District, said in a statement. “I said while I disagree with the decision, I am sorry, on a human level, that he was put in the national spotlight and look forward to working with him. We have received many calls and emails expressing support for my speaking out and thanking me.”

The X, formerly Twitter, post has gone viral, Austin said at the meeting, drawing attention to the school district from people all over the country, especially Texas.

“It is absurd that Palo Alto School district just voted to remove honors biology for all students & already removed honors English,” Khanna wrote in the post. “They call it de-laning. I call it an assault on excellence. I took many honors classes at Council Rock High in PA.”

Posted July 22^nd 2025 onThe Brandeis Center    

Washington, D.C. (July 21, 2025) – The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law and the law firm of Cohen Williams LLP filed a complaint today against the Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD) and the PAUSD’s Board of Education in the Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara, alleging that PAUSD and the Board violated California’s open meeting laws, the Brown Act, by misleading the public about an important agenda item involving the district’s ethnic studies curriculum. The Brandeis Center and its partners brought a Brown Act lawsuit against Santa Ana Unified School District for approving ethnic student courses without public notice. The courses were riddled with anti-Semitism. The case settled with Santa Ana agreeing to remove the biased materials.

The complaint alleges that PAUSD violated the Brown Act in January when it approved a requirement that PAUSD high school students must complete an ethnic studies course to graduate, beginning with the class of 2029, a year earlier than it had informed the public originally.  Three new Board members had been elected on promises of pausing the implementation of ethnic studies in order to obtain further input from the community. Consistent with that approach, the PAUSD Superintendent announced on January 16, 2025 that PAUSD would “pause” its ethnic studies rollout and await direction from the State. 

In response, however, certain members of the Board used the moment to sow confusion, calling a surprise Board meeting on January 23, 2025, at which they purported to “confirm” that completion of ethnic studies would “remain a graduation requirement beginning with the Class of 2029.”  No such graduation requirement existed at the time of the January 23, 2025, meeting, and, therefore, no such graduation requirement could be confirmed.  Furthermore, when confronted with questions about the content of the ethnic studies course, the district disavowed the draft course materials that had been circulated for public comment and refused to answer attendees’ questions about the course on the grounds that they reflected an inappropriate lack of “trust” in the Board. But California gives parents the right to trust and verify for themselves. 

“PAUSD’s actions are part of a concerning trend emerging in K-12 schools where board members act behind closed doors and without the required public notice in order to approve K-12 curriculum that may be controversial, inflame bigotry, and even be unlawful,” said Hon. Kenneth L. Marcus, chairman and CEO of the Brandeis Center and the former U.S. Assistant Secretary of Education who ran the Office of Civil Rights during two administrations. “The actions of PAUSD and their Board are a blatant attempt to circumvent public opinion and bypass the very legal protections that every individual – and parent – in California possesses.”

• You don't have to speak from memory. It is perfectly acceptable to read a statement off of a sheet of paper, a cell phone, or a laptop.

• Know that all comments become part of the public record. This is hugely important. One of the key components of being a citizen in a representative republic is making sure your views are known. This is done at the voting booth, yes, but it is also done at school board, city council, and townhall meetings. Make your voice heard.

Sample School Board Statement

Good evening school board members.

I stand before you today as a concerned mother / father / parent / citizen [and member of Moms for Liberty]. As you know the Supreme Court recently passed down a decision in Mahmoud v Taylor which affects every school district in the United States. In that decision the Court held that when Montgomery County Maryland public schools refused to opt children out of the K-5 curriculum which their parents objected to, that they acted in violation of the First Amendment's Free Exercise Clause.

Justice Alito wrote that mandating our young children to engage with these materials presented as normative and celebratory, substantially interfered with parents' rights to raise their children according to their sincerely held beliefs. In effect, the schools crossed a constitutional line by conditioning a public education on acceptance of viewpoints conflicting with their families' faith.

What does this mean for this district? Schools should provide clear advance notification to parents about any upcoming lessons covering the topics of gender identity, sexuality, or other related themes.

Thank you.

Sample Student Opt Out Letter (for Religious Beliefs)

Dear Superintendent X, School Board Members, Principal X, Assistant Principal X, Director of Student Services X, 

Based on our religious beliefs, and the June 27, 2025 Supreme Court ruling Mahmoud v Taylor, I am hereby immediately opting out my children ([list names]) – from all LGBTQ+ related texts, surveys, and curricula lessons in their public schools, regardless of when that material is to be presented during the school day.

I am further exercising my right to opt out my children from mandatory preferred pronoun usage and shared-sex bathroom and locker room policies at their public schools, which are predicated on the district leadership’s beliefs about gender identity that run contrary to our religion and are a violation of both constitutional and statutory law.

I look forward to receiving communication from the district as to how you will implement the Mahmoud v Taylor decision. Specifically, I look forward to learning about how and when you intend to be compliant with it and plan to alert parents about related changes to the district’s gender identity policies. I also look forward to learning about your plan to notify us about any upcoming LGBTQ+ lessons, including those on gender identity, before they are taught to our children in their public schools. Finally, I would also like to know what discipline will be applied if a teacher/principal/school does not honor this opt out request.

Please confirm receipt of my request. My expectation is that my request be implemented on the first day of school. 

Sincerely,

Parent/Advocate/Guardian

California's Continued Craziness...

Rather than reflecting on their decades-long failures to provide adequate education to California children, the educrats  accuse the federal government of threatening "America's workforce and our global competitiveness."

While the education establishment continues to play the blame game, we are strengthening our resolve to help local parents, students and community leaders reclaim merit, equality and excellence, one school district at a time. Through policy monitoring, voter education, legal advocacy, and alliance building, we are working tirelessly to redeem the American spirit and values. At the end of the day, America is worth fighting for!

Per an X post by WomenAreReal regarding AB1487:

[S]ummary of the bill: AB1487 expands an already bloated taxpayer-funded program that promotes gender ideology under the guise of "public health." Since 2021, millions have gone to the TGI Wellness Fund which is used for things like painting classes, hormone treatments, and surgeries with zero oversight or outcome tracking and a special focus on tribal and rural communities. This bill proposes we expand the fund even further: funding resettlement programs for trans-identified asylum seekers, trans workforce training, and trans youth diversion programs.

Moms for Liberty is a Proud Official Partner of A250

Moms for Liberty: Helping to foster a renewed culture of service and patriotism...

Moms for Liberty Santa Clara supports Sonja Shaw 

for California State Superintendent of Public Instruction