Encinitas, CA—A federal case, fiercely litigated for more than two years, involving controversial transgender sexuality indoctrination in a public school has resolved. This follows an early “coerced speech” preliminary injunction win by families in S.E. v. Grey, a significant policy change following the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Mahmoud v. Taylor, and the district’s agreement to pay $175,000. The two Christian plaintiff families were represented by attorneys at The National Center for Law & Policy and First Liberty Institute.
The facts in this case are quite compelling. Without any notice or warning, two 5th-grade Christian boys were read a book as part of the school’s buddy mentoring program. The book My Shadow is Pink promotes and affirms transgender sexual ideology. Next, the mentors joined their kindergartner mentee buddies to view a video of the same book. After the video, the fifth grader mentors were instructed to ask the kindergartner mentees to pick out the color of their shadow, representing their gender identity, and trace the outline of the kindergartners’ bodies on the ground with the colored chalk.
Carlos and Jenny Encinas have a son who attended La Costa Heights Elementary School in the Encinitas Union School District. They and other Christian parents were naturally upset when they found out what their fifth-grade sons had been forced to participate in at school. They asked the district to notify them and allow them to opt out of the LGBTQ+ instruction in the future. EUSD refused, informing them they would continue these lessons, would not notify parents, and would not permit them to opt out.
After Carlos raised his concerns, school district employees and other parents responded with hostility toward his family, and the PTA president organized a “Pink out the Hate” day where half the school wore pink in support of transgender rights. The Encinas family received threats by phone and in person, and their sons were bullied to the point where they had to transfer to a different school. Along with another local family, the Encinas are suing to bring accountability to the District, and to seek a court order stating that the District notify parents in advance and allow opt-outs from teaching that violates parents’ sincerely held religious and moral beliefs.
The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California on September 10, 2024, and a motion for a preliminary injunction was subsequently filed. On May 12, 2025, Judge M. James Lorenz granted that motion in part, requiring the school district to provide advance notice and opt-outs when gender identity material is taught in mentoring programs. The judge’s opinion focused on the fact that EUSD compelled the speech of the two 5th grade boys, forcing them to participate in and express transgender messages that conflict with their Christian faith, finding that the plaintiffs were likely to succeed on the merits of that claim.
Less than a month later, on June 27, 2025, EUSD suffered another big legal blow when the United States Supreme Court issued a ruling in Mahmoud v. Taylor. In Mahmoud, a majority of the Court ruled that the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment requires public schools to provide parents with notice and a right to opt out whenever they provide any instruction, including, but not limited to, LGBTQ+ instruction, that substantially undermines the religion parents are inculcating at home.
On September 9, 2026, Shea Encinas and his mother Jenny shared their powerful story at a U.S. Department of Justice Religious Liberty Commission hearing, where Shea was introduced by President Donald Trump. They detailed how they were targeted and harassed by administrators and classmates after objecting to transgender indoctrination. In November, 2025, in light of the Mahmoud decision, EUSD dismissed its preliminary injunction loss appeal and changed its policy to provide district families with prior notice and opt-out rights. This month, on the eve of the depositions of key witnesses and parties, including EUSD board members, administrators, and teachers, the case settled with EUSD agreeing to pay plaintiffs $175,000 on July 27, 2026. “Fortunately, faithful families do not forfeit their First Amendment rights at the public schoolhouse door,” stated Dean Broyles, president and chief counsel of the National Center for Law & Policy. “This was truly a team effort, with San Diego attorney Rob Reynolds getting us across the finish line to get the case resolved. We believe these results vindicate the religious free exercise, free speech, and parental rights of our Christian clients, who have endured and suffered much. Public schools must honor and respect the religious beliefs of students and families, not coercively attempt to erase and replace religious beliefs with their extreme sexual ideologies. All ideological coercion and bullying are wrong, including anti-Christian bullying by state schools.” them to opt out of the LGBTQ+ instruction in the future. EUSD refused, informing them they would continue these lessons, would not notify parents, and would not permit them to opt out.
After Carlos raised his concerns, school district employees and other parents responded with hostility toward his family, and the PTA president organized a “Pink out the Hate” day where half the school wore pink in support of transgender rights. The Encinas family received threats by phone and in person, and their sons were bullied to the point where they had to transfer to a different school. Along with another local family, the Encinas are suing to bring accountability to the District, and to seek a court order stating that the District notify parents in advance and allow opt-outs
from teaching that violates parents’ sincerely held religious and moral beliefs. The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California on September 10, 2024, and a motion for a preliminary injunction was subsequently filed. On May 12, 2025, Judge M. James Lorenz granted that motion in part, requiring the school district to provide advance notice and opt-outs when gender identity material is taught in mentoring programs. The judge’s opinion focused on the fact that EUSD compelled the speech of the two 5th grade boys, forcing them to participate in and express transgender messages that conflict with their Christian faith, finding that the plaintiffs were likely to succeed on the merits of that claim.
Less than a month later, on June 27, 2025, EUSD suffered another big legal blow when the United States Supreme Court issued a ruling in Mahmoud v. Taylor. In Mahmoud, a majority of the Court ruled that the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment requires public schools to provide parents with notice and a right to opt out whenever they provide any instruction, including, but not limited to, LGBTQ+ instruction, that substantially undermines the religion parents are inculcating at home.
On September 9, 2026, Shea Encinas and his mother Jenny shared their powerful story at a U.S. Department of Justice Religious Liberty Commission hearing, where Shea was introduced by President Donald Trump. They detailed how they were targeted and harassed by administrators and classmates after objecting to transgender indoctrination. In November, 2025, in light of the Mahmoud decision, EUSD dismissed its preliminary injunction loss appeal and changed its policy to provide district families with prior notice and opt-out rights. This month, on the eve of the depositions of key witnesses and parties, including EUSD board members, administrators, and teachers, the case settled with EUSD agreeing to pay plaintiffs $175,000 on July 27, 2026.
“Fortunately, faithful families do not forfeit their First Amendment rights at the public schoolhouse door,” stated Dean Broyles, president and chief counsel of the National Center for Law & Policy. “This was truly a team effort, with San Diego attorney Rob Reynolds getting us across the finish line to get the case resolved. We believe these results vindicate the religious free exercise, free speech, and parental rights of our Christian clients, who
have endured and suffered much. Public schools must honor and respect the religious beliefs of students and families, not coercively attempt to erase and replace religious beliefs with their extreme sexual ideologies. All ideological coercion and bullying are wrong, including anti-Christian bullying by state schools.”