A California school district has agreed to pay $175,000 to two families who sued after a teacher told their fifth grade sons to tutor kindergarteners on exploring different gender identities.
In May 2024, fifth graders at La Costa Heights Elementary School in Carlsbad read a book titled “My Shadow Is Pink” about a boy who wears dresses and plays with girls’ toys. A teacher then showed a companion video and told them to help assigned kindergarten buddies identify their genders as pink or blue.
The families filed a religious liberty lawsuit against the Encinitas Union School District four months later in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California. It notes that administrators repeatedly refused to excuse their boys from the buddy reading program, despite complaints that the story confused them and violated their Christian faith.
“The story involves a conflict between the boy and his father, where the father eventually comes to accept his son’s belief and agrees that the boy’s pink shadow is not just a phase but reflects his ’inner-most self,’” U.S. Magistrate Judge Stephen B. Chu wrote in a 10-page order dated Monday.
In May 2025, District Judge M. James Lorenz granted a preliminary injunction that blocked the school district from “including in buddy program class activities and materials any gender identity topics covered in health instruction, unless Defendants provide parents with advance notice and an opportunity to opt out.”
The Encinitas district appealed to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in June 2025. Later that month, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Mahmoud v. Taylor that schools must provide advance notice and allow opt-outs from grade school LGBTQ lessons, leading the district to change its policies in August 2025.
In a statement emailed Tuesday to The Washington Times, Encinitas Union School District officials said this policy update means the out-of-court settlement requires no further changes.
“There are no winners when limited public education resources are diverted from classrooms to prolonged litigation,” said Marisa Janine-Page, the Encinitas district’s co-counsel. “That is why the District chose to resolve this case, so it could put the litigation behind it and move forward focused on its students and its educational mission.”
Judge Chu noted in his order dismissing the case that both sides agreed the settlement terms were “fair and reasonable.”
He wrote that while one boy “received some counseling,” and the other may do so in the future, there was no proof the lessons caused them any psychological harm.
Of the settlement amount, each of the two boys will receive $10,000, deposited in a 529 education savings account until they turn 18. An additional $27,000 will cover legal fees, and the rest will go directly to their parents.
Attorneys from the First Liberty Institute and the National Center for Law & Policy represented the families in court. They hailed the settlement as a victory for parents’ constitutional rights to opt out of instruction that violates their conscience.
“No child should be forced to speak a message that violates his religious convictions,” said Nate Kellum, First Liberty’s senior counsel. “We are grateful that we were able to reach this settlement on behalf of the families involved.”
Contact the author
Please read our comment policy before commenting.