Sonja has served as President of the Board of Education since 2023. She represents her District as City of Chino Liaison and as a representative of the Baldy View Regional Occupational Program Commission.

The Moms for Liberty Santa Clara chapter is proud to support Sonja Shaw in her run for California State Superintendent of Public Instruction. Godspeed Sonja!

Moms for Liberty Santa Clara is now working with 917 Society

to get Constitutions into the hands of 8^th Graders

The date September 17, 1787 marks an event that changed the world. It is the day when the United States Constitution was signed by the delegates of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Moms for Liberty Santa Clara is now working with the 917 Society to get copies of our founding documents -- the Constitution and Declaration of Independence -- into the hands of 8th graders throughout the county. We believe it very important that our young people understand what makes this nation exceptional.

Dismantling the Child Transgender Industry

From a post by Parents Rights in Education       .

Who’s Protesting?

Just hours after the decision, activist groups like Advocates for Youth and the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) gathered on the Supreme Court steps. They called the ruling “dangerous” and claimed it “threatens access to care for trans people across the country.”

So what exactly are they saying? Here’s a quick look:

• The ruling “endangers the lives of trans young people.

• ”Blocking these treatments violates basic human rights.
• It’s especially unfair to “trans youth of color.”
• No child should have to “cross state lines” to get what they call basic medical care.

But Here’s the Real Story

Parents who’ve been fighting to protect kids know the truth:

• Countries like Norway, Sweden, Finland, and the U.K. have already banned or heavily restricted these treatments for minors — because the risks are just too high and the evidence doesn’t hold up.

• Puberty blockers and surgeries can cause permanent damage to healthy, developing bodies. There’s no undoing it.

• Families are often told these treatments are harmless and “reversible.” They’re not. Just ask Chloe Cole and many other young people who regret what was done to them when they were too young to fully understand.

Who Should Decide a Child’s Future?

HRC says:

“No young person should be pushed into a future they did not choose.”

We agree — but here’s the reality: right now, our public schools are encouraging kids to believe their biological bodies aren’t simply male or female — that they can “change” their sex. Children as young as five are taught to question whether they’re boys or girls. Even worse, some school staff are helping kids secretly socially transition and connecting them to experimental medical treatments without parents ever knowing.

Kids shouldn’t be making adult, life-altering medical choices at ages 10, 12, or 15. Protecting them now means they can grow up healthy and whole — with all options still open when they’re truly ready to choose their own path.

Where Else Are Bans in Place?

This Supreme Court decision gives states a clear green light to protect kids — and many already have:

• 27 states have laws banning or restricting puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and surgeries for minors.

• 25 of those bans are currently in effect.

• More states are expected to follow soon.

• European countries are ahead of us: after years of research, they’ve shut down these treatments for minors to protect kids from irreversible harm.

Where Are the Legal Battles Now?

Despite the Supreme Court ruling, activists are still suing states to overturn these bans. Here’s a quick snapshot:

Altogether, about 17 states are still fighting in court. But the Supreme Court ruling makes it clear: states can protect children.

What Should Parents Do Now?

This fight isn’t over. Activist groups won’t stop. Courts will keep hearing cases. But your voice — the voice of parents — will matter more than ever.

Stay informed. Speak up. Support leaders who stand with families. And never let anyone shame you for protecting your child’s right to grow up safe, healthy, and whole.

A Massive Victory for Children Everywhere

The Supreme Court Upholds Tennessee Law Restricting Child Sex Change Interventions

From a post on Do No Harm          

Specifically, the Court held that Tennessee’s law is constitutional and does not discriminate based on sex or transgender status. This means that laws like Tennessee’s are legitimate and lawful, opening the door for other states to enact similar protections for children.

“Today the Supreme Court ruled, 6-3, that governments can enact commonsense policies that protect children from dangerous medical procedures,” said Stanley Goldfarb, MD, Chairman of Do No Harm. “The decision should end the debate over laws like Tennessee’s, and it could have important ramifications for other commonsense policies that resist radical gender ideology.” 

“The Supreme Court’s strong decision today is a massive win in the fight to protect children from harmful gender ideology. Transgender treatments for minors are experimental medicine not backed by reliable evidence,” said Kristina Rasmussen, Executive Director, Do No Harm. “Do No Harm is proud to have been in the fight to expose this ideology over the last several years and support Tennessee in this case. We will continue to work nationally and in other states to protect children from the harms of sex change treatments.”

Tennessee’s law bans procedures enabling “a minor to identify with, or live as, a purported identity inconsistent with the minor’s sex” or to address “purported discomfort or distress from a discordance between the minor’s sex and asserted identity.”

The law reflects the fact that child sex change interventions are dangerous, carry unknown long-term risks, and are supported by weak, dubious, and error-filled evidence.

However, in April 2023, the ACLU, Lambda Legal, and Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP sued Tennessee to block enforcement of SB 1, arguing that the law violates the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment, as well as Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act.

That same month, the Department of Justice intervened in the case and filed its own complaint against Tennessee, also arguing that the law violates the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause.

On Sinister Semantics...

“Affirming language is something all clinicians can use to honor patients’ experiences and protect their dignity,” the authors argue. “Every clinician can express empathy. No executive order can prevent a clinician from ensuring transgender patients seeking care feel heard and understood. Now more than ever, silence may be construed as support for antitransgender policies, stoking the fear patients are already experiencing.”

In a blog post, Do No Harm explains why this approach and its embrace of so-called “affirming language” is damaging to children struggling with gender dysphoria.

Obscuring the actual nature of a child’s condition and using terms, which implicitly assume medicalization and transition are the only acceptable courses of action, is not “empathy” and does not “honor” patients’ experience.

Instead, using these terms constitutes a dereliction of duty and is incompatible with the foundational principles of medical ethics.

From Other News Sources...

Democrats Compared Parental Rights Groups to the KKK While Passing a Transgender Law.Now, Those Groups Are Suing.

"The State of Colorado cannot stifle viewpoints it doesn’t like simply because it finds those views offensive or disagreeable,” Sarah Parshall Perry, vice president and legal fellow at the parental rights group Defending Education, told The Daily Signal in a statement Tuesday.

The parental rights groups Defending Education, the Colorado Parent Advocacy Network, and Protect Kids Colorado teamed up with the medical watchdog group Do No Harm and a medical doctor, Dr. Travis Morrell, to file the lawsuit Monday, challenging HB 25-1312, which Polis, a Democrat, signed Friday. The law amends the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act, which bars discrimination on the basis of “gender expression,” specifically stating that refusing to use a person’s “chosen name” will constitute discrimination.

The lawsuit claims this violates the First Amendment by compelling Coloradans to speak to promote transgender issues, in violation of their free speech. It also claims that requiring staff at places of public accommodation to use a transgender person’s “chosen name” is unconstitutionally vague and subject to arbitrary enforcement, violating the 14th Amendment.

LAUSD is going to borrow $500 million in bonds, without a vote of the people, to help payoff $900 million in sexual assault lawsuits.  In total, LAUSD has $2-3 billion in lawsuits that have to be settled. Where does the money come from to pay off bonds the voters never approved?

“Board members approved the expenditure on June 3 without comment, agreeing to borrow up to $500 million through judgment obligation bonds with an estimated 6.10% interest rate, documents show. Unlike bonds for school construction, they did not require voter approval. The debt is due to be paid off in 15 years. The claims are not covered by insurance carriers.

This fiscal year, the district’s undisclosed number of settlement claims was roughly $302 million, Vaughan said.”

They never even discussed it among themselves!  This is massive corruption—and the mainstream media has not reported on any of this!

LAUSD agrees to fund $900 million to settle sexual assault lawsuits

Thomas Peele And Mallika Seshadri, EdSource,  6/16/25   https://edsource.org/2025/lausd-agrees-to-pay-900-million-to-settle-sexual-assault-lawsuits/734608

The Los Angeles Unified school board did not discuss the bonds for settling sexual assault lawsuits before members authorized them on June 3.

Credit: Livestream recordings of LAUSD board meetings

The story was updated on June 16 to include the estimated cost of finance charges and interest on the bonds.

Top Takeaways

• School trustees authorize bonds without comment or public explanation.
• Lawmakers were warned of the financial impact of erasing the statute of limitations.
• Other districts also face massive costs in response to a 2019 state law.

The Los Angeles Unified School District board has quietly approved borrowing nearly $900 million — including interest — to settle decades-old sexual assault cases involving former students.

And that will likely not be enough to settle all the claims the nation’s second-largest school district is facing under 2019 legislation that allows victims of abuse by school employees to seek damages for incidents dating back to the 1970s. District spokesperson Britt Vaughan would not say how many claims the district faces, the number that have been settled and what they have cost to date.

Board members approved the expenditure on June 3 without comment, agreeing to borrow up to $500 million through judgment obligation bonds with an estimated 6.10% interest rate, documents show. Unlike bonds for school construction, they did not require voter approval. The debt is due to be paid off in 15 years. The claims are not covered by insurance carriers. 

This fiscal year, the district’s undisclosed number of settlement claims was roughly $302 million, Vaughan said.

“The board has been talking about judgment obligation bonds for, I would say, about a year and a half,” board member Tanya Ortiz Franklin said in an interview. Spreading out the payments means “the district’s current students aren’t punished by depleting resources,” she said.

No public hearings were held. Board members were briefed about the matter in small groups, she said. “We also had several conversations in closed sessions, as we typically do with legal cases.” She did not disclose the number of claims made against the district or how many were settled.

The district administration will likely ask the board to approve more borrowing next year to settle additional claims, Ortiz Franklin said. 

The district is far from alone in facing massive payouts to victims who have filed claims under the legislation, Assembly Bill 218, which experts say is impacting local public agencies throughout the state.

Los Angeles County alone is facing $4 billion in settlements involving formerly incarcerated juveniles and foster youth.

By taking on long-term debt to deal with the AB 218 cases, LAUSD is “lessening any potential impacts to (its) core education programs in the near term,” by spreading out the settlement costs, supporting documents provided to board members stated. Nonetheless, the cost of paying down $500 million in bonds – with finance charges and interest of roughly $400,000 million – will reduce spending on students from the district’s general fund by tens of millions of dollars annually for the 15 years after the bond is issued. 

AB 218, brought by then-Assemblymember Lorena Gonzalez, rolled back the statute of limitations for abuse claims involving public employees like teachers to “22 years from the date the plaintiff” becomes an adult “or within 5 years of the date the plaintiff discovers or reasonably should have discovered that the psychological injury or illness occurring after” reaching adulthood was caused by sexual assault. Gov. Gavin Newsom signed the bill on Oct. 13, 2019.