SEATTLE — A judge has suspended parts of a new parental rights law in Washington state that critics are deriding as a “forced outing” measure..
King County Superior Court Judge Michael Scott on Friday suspended parts of the law while a lawsuit filed by civil liberties groups and others is pending. The Seattle Times reports this.
The law, known as Initiative 2081, came into effect on June 6. A provision of the law outlining how and when schools must respond to requests for information from parents was suspended Friday, as was a provision giving parents access to their students’ medical and mental health records.
Other provisions of the law remain in effect for now, including a section allowing parents to opt their children out of assignments and other “student assignments” that include questions about topics such as morality, religion, sexuality and politics.
Adrien Leavitt, staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union of Washington, one of the groups that filed the lawsuit, said the organization was pleased the ruling would prevent parts of the law from “causing further harm” while it looks for a final decision is being sought. .
“(The initiative) gave parents this new right to obtain medical or mental health records related to their students who appear at schools, and that contradicts the fact that young people in Washington have the right to confidential health care,” says Julia Marks, trial attorney. at Legal Voice, another group challenging the law.
The initiative was backed by Brian Heywood, a conservative megadonor who has said the measure is not intended to give parents a veto over their child’s decision to access counseling or medical treatment, but only says they have the right to be aware of this.
Heywood said in a statement that “activist judges think they are smarter than legislators, who in turn think they are smarter than voters.”
The Democratic-led Legislature overwhelmingly approved the measure in March, with progressive lawmakers seeking to keep the measure out of the fall ballot and calculating that courts would likely block it.
Critics have said the measure could harm students who go to school clinics seeking access to contraception, referrals for reproductive services, counseling related to their gender identity or sexual orientation, or treatment or support for sexual assault or domestic violence. In many of those cases, the students don’t want their parents to know, they said.
The ACLU of Washington and other groups challenging the measure say it violates the state constitution, which requires new laws not to revise or repeal old laws without explicitly saying so.
For example, state law guarantees the privacy of medical records for youth who are authorized to receive care, including abortions, without parental consent. The new law would give parents the right to be notified before their child receives care and the ability to view school medical records, the plaintiffs say, but it does not specifically say it would change the existing privacy law .