California School District Settles Case Over Notice and Opt-Out From Gender-Identity Buddy Lesson
A California school district has settled a federal case after parents said they were refused notice and a religious opt-out from a gender-identity lesson in an elementary “buddy” program.
That outcome is a settlement, plus an earlier preliminary injunction and a reported policy update. It is not a full court ruling on every constitutional claim. This post explains what the court order and public reporting say — and what parents anywhere can do if they want notice and a written religious opt-out for their own child.
It is not legal advice. Great Education Initiative (GEI) is a national 501(c)(3). We do not take sides on whether any parent should sue.
What happened in the Encinitas buddy program (sourced facts)
According to court papers and reporting, the case centers on Encinitas Union School District in San Diego County, California, and La Costa Heights Elementary School.
In May 2024, fifth graders were paired with kindergarten “buddies” for an activity that used the book My Shadow Is Pink. Reporting and the court’s settlement order describe a gender-identity lesson in that buddy setting.
Parents later asked for notice and an opt-out from similar teaching. The district’s response, as the court order and outlets summarize it: the buddy program was “not part of a health unit” / not health education — and therefore outside the opt-out path parents expected for health instruction.
Exact day-of-month for that May 2024 class: NOT FOUND in the sources used here (month and year only). Full text of any later district policy document: NOT FOUND beyond press summaries.
Parents asked for notice and opt-out — and were refused
Two families sued. Public plaintiffs include S.E., by parents Carlos and Jennifer Encinas, and P.D., by parents Tom and Rebecca Doe (the Does were allowed to proceed under fictitious names). Counsel for the parents included First Liberty Institute and The National Center for Law & Policy.
The complaint, as summarized in the September 2026 settlement order, asserted Free Speech, Free Exercise, and Due Process claims. Parents said they wanted advance notice and a chance to excuse their children from similar gender-identity teaching. They said the district refused.
Do not invent a California Education Code § 51932 cite for this docket. That section number was NOT FOUND in the required Encinitas sources. What is sourced: the district treated the buddy program as outside a “health unit” / not health education. Reason’s coverage of the earlier injunction also discusses California’s health-instruction religious opt-out statute (§ 51240) in that posture — not as a GEI claim that every classroom is “health.”
Case snapshot: parties, court, preliminary injunction, settlement
Case: S.E. et al. v. Grey et al., No. 3:24-cv-01611-SBC (also styled 24-cv-1611-SBC), U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California
Complaint filed: September 10, 2024
Preliminary injunction: Order granting in part May 12, 2025 (Judge M. James Lorenz); PI entered May 19, 2025 — buddy-program activities/materials shall not cover gender-identity topics covered in health instruction unless the district gives advance notice and an opportunity to opt out
Appeal: District appealed the PI to the Ninth Circuit around June 11, 2025; that appeal was later voluntarily dismissed (Ninth Circuit order noted November 19, 2025 in the settlement order)
Settlement order: Dated / filed September 14, 2026 — court approved the minors’ compromise, vacated the May 19, 2025 PI, and dismissed the case with prejudice (court keeps jurisdiction to enforce settlement until payment)
Press: First Liberty (Sep 15, 2026); Reason / Volokh Conspiracy (Sep 15, 2026); Just the News (Sep 15, 2026); Washington Times (Sep 16, 2026)
Settlement + prior PI / policy change — not a full merits ruling on every claim
Keep these layers straight:
Preliminary injunction — Limited, temporary relief about notice/opt-out for gender-identity topics in the buddy program when those topics are covered in health instruction Avoid: Calling the PI a final nationwide curriculum holding
Policy update (reporting) — First Liberty: district changed policies to provide notification/opt-outs when promoting gender ideology or material that substantially interferes with families’ religious beliefs. Washington Times: district changed policies in August 2025 after Mahmoud; district said the settlement requires no further policy changes beyond that update Avoid: Inventing full policy wording not in the sources
Settlement — Parties settled; court approved $175,000 total; PI vacated; case dismissed with prejudice Avoid: “Court ruled parents win on all constitutional claims”
Money (prefer the court order): Total $175,000.00. Court allocation: S.E. minor $10,000; P.D. minor $10,000; Carlos and Jennifer Encinas $98,000; Tom and Rebecca Doe $30,000; First Liberty fees $17,000; NCLP fees $10,000. Each minor’s $10,000 goes into a custodial 529 education account until the age of majority. Reason’s shorthand — about $108k to S.E. and family, $40k to P.D. and family, $27k to lawyers — matches that math. First Liberty’s press release called the amount “undisclosed”; when this post states dollars, it follows the court order (and Reason’s consistent shorthand).
Usable quotes from reporting: Nate Kellum (First Liberty) — “No child should be forced to speak a message that violates his religious convictions.” District co-counsel Marisa Janine-Page (Washington Times) — resources were diverted to litigation; the district chose to resolve the case to focus on students and its mission.
How this relates to Mahmoud v. Taylor (carefully)
In Mahmoud v. Taylor (June 27, 2025, 6–3), the Supreme Court held that parents in that case were entitled to a preliminary injunction for notice and a religious opt-out from certain elementary instruction. The facts were specific. It is not a blanket nationwide curriculum opt-out. It does not mean every school must honor the GEI Parental Opt-Out form.
Press coverage ties Encinitas policy updates to the earlier PI and to Mahmoud. That is context. It is not a claim that Mahmoud alone ordered this settlement amount or rewrote every California classroom rule. Do not copy broader paraphrases that say schools “must” allow opt-outs from all grade-school LGBTQ lessons.
Why notice and a written religious opt-out still matter for parents nationally
You may never live in Encinitas. The case still raises questions parents ask in many districts:
Will the school tell me before a lesson that conflicts with our family’s faith?
If a lesson sits outside a “health” unit, can I still ask for notice and a written opt-out?
If I put the request in writing, will it go into the student file with a dated receipt?
GEI’s answer is not a verdict on this lawsuit. It is practical: put the request in writing, keep a copy, and ask for a dated receipt. Start with our parent guide. Then get the form.
Calm next steps: parent guide and the GEI Parental Opt-Out form
Read the parent guide — notice, religious-based opt-out, and plain limits.
Get the GEI Parental Opt-Out form: Request the form on this page, then save the PDF.
If your district has its own form, use that too. Attach GEI’s pages if they help you state your religious reason clearly.
Make two copies. Give one to the school. Ask only for a dated “received” stamp. Keep your copy.
This is not legal advice. A lawyer or local rights group may be needed if a school will not take or honor a written request.
FAQ: parental opt-out, religious opt-out, and school districts
Can I request notice and a religious opt-out from certain elementary instruction that conflicts with my faith?
Parents often can put a written religious opt-out request on file when specific instruction conflicts with a sincerely held religious belief. Rules vary by state and district. Start with the parent guide. This is not legal advice.
How do I put a parental opt-out request in writing so the school has a dated record?
Use your district’s form if it has one. You can also get the form from GEI — request it on the opt-out form page, then save the PDF. Make two copies. Ask for a dated receipt. Keep one.
What if a school says a lesson is not “health” education and therefore outside the usual opt-out?
That is what parents faced in the Encinitas buddy-program dispute, according to the court order and reporting: the district said the activity was not part of a health unit / not health education. Whether that answer is enough under federal religious-liberty claims is a legal question for courts and counsel. GEI does not decide it here. Parents can still ask in writing for notice and a religious opt-out, and keep copies.
How do I get the GEI Parental Opt-Out form, and should I still use my district’s form if it has one?
Get the form at https://www.greatei.org/opt-out-form — request on the page, then save the PDF. If your district has its own form, complete that form too and attach GEI’s so your instructions are clear. The district form and GEI’s form are not the same thing.
Did a settlement mean the court decided every constitutional claim on the merits?
No. A settlement ends the case by agreement. Here the court also vacated the preliminary injunction and dismissed with prejudice. That is not the same as a full merits judgment on every Free Speech, Free Exercise, or Due Process theory.
Did the Supreme Court create a blanket nationwide curriculum opt-out in Mahmoud v. Taylor?
No. Mahmoud v. Taylor (June 27, 2025, 6–3) gave parents in that case a preliminary injunction for notice and a religious opt-out from certain elementary instruction. It is not a blanket nationwide curriculum opt-out.
What should I ask for if I want advance notice before lessons on sex, gender, or related topics?
Ask in writing for advance notice and a chance to review materials. Ask how the district handles religious opt-outs, including lessons the school does not label as “health.” Keep copies of what you send and what you receive.
Where can parents find a calm parent guide on religious-based opt-outs (not legal advice)?
GEI’s parent guide to religious-based opt-outs. National. Educational. Not legal advice.
Sources
U.S. District Court order (Doc 103), filed Sep 14, 2026 — S.E. et al. v. Grey et al., 3:24-cv-01611-SBC — https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.casd.793117/gov.uscourts.casd.793117.103.0.pdf (verified 18 Sep 2026)
First Liberty Institute press release, Sep 15, 2026 — https://firstliberty.org/media/california-parents-resolve-case-after-convincing-school-district-to-notify-provide-opt-outs-from-gender-ideology-lessons/
Reason / Volokh Conspiracy (Eugene Volokh), Sep 15, 2026 — https://reason.com/volokh/2026/09/15/175k-settlement-in-suit-over-requiring-fifth-graders-to-read-pro-gender-ideology-books-to-kindergarten-students-with-no-opt-out/
Just the News / The Center Square (Esther Wickham), Sep 15, 2026 — https://justthenews.com/nation/states/center-square/settlement-prompts-lgbtq-policy-change-ca-school-district
The Washington Times (Sean Salai), Sep 16, 2026 — https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2026/sep/16/california-school-district-settles-lawsuit-making-kids-take-gender/ — used for Aug 2025 policy-update reporting, district co-counsel quote, and $175k corroboration; Mahmoud paraphrase in WT not copied (too broad for GEI hedge)
Comments