Advancing American Freedom led a coalition of 48 co-amici filing an amicus brief in International Partners for Ethical Care v. Ferguson.
This case challenges a Washington law that directs state-licensed shelters to contact the Department of Children, Youth and Family Services (DCYF), not the parents, when a runaway child shows up at a shelter seeking “gender-affirming treatment.” DCYF is then required to attempt to reach out to the child's parents but is also directed to refer the child for "gender-affirming treatment" whether contact is made with the parents or not and thus potentially without the parents' consent.
Few if any unenumerated fundamental rights are more deeply rooted in American history and tradition than parental rights. Yet the Ninth Circuit ruled that the parents lack standing to sue and that the courts need not hear parents’ claims until after it may be too late. Though not all violations of fundamental rights are obvious, as Justice Scalia once said “this wolf comes as a wolf.” The Supreme Court ought to allow the parents’ challenge to proceed and reinforce its long-held principle that parents have the right to raise their children according to their values.
“The deprivation of the parental right is no less severe because the minor child’s choice to run away contributes to the deprivation. When that choice is incentivized by the state and then ratified by the state’s acquiescence in that decision, the state is responsible for the deprivation,” said AAF General Counsel J. Marc Wheat. “Standing doctrine should not be blind to constitutional harm that has not yet occurred but which, if it were to occur, would have irreversible consequences. This Court should rule for Petitioners and ensure that parental rights remain secure in every state in the nation.”