“Strong schools and strong families are not in conflict; they are partners in the responsibility of educating their children’’ – La Center School District Superintendent Peter Rosenkranz
Ken Vance, editor
Clark County Today
It appears the La Center School District and Superintendent Peter Rosenkranz have found a formidable ally in their long battle with the Washington State Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI). For years, the OSPI has tried to bully Rosenkranz (and the district) into changing their gender pronoun policy.
Earlier this week, the United States Supreme Court issued a per curiam opinion in Mirabelli v. Bonta, addressing whether school policies that prevent educators from informing parents about significant gender identity decisions at school are consistent with the Constitution.
In its opinion, the Court explained that parents challenging such policies are likely to succeed on the merits of their claims under both the First and Fourteenth Amendments. The Court reaffirmed a long-established principle in American law: “Parents, not the state, hold primary authority over the upbringing and care of their children, including participation in decisions affecting their children’s well-being and mental health.”
Background of battle over LCSD gender pronoun policy
In an email distributed to teachers and staff on Oct. 28, 2022, Rosenkranz shared the district’s gender pronoun policy, which called for teachers and staff members to not ask students for their pronoun preferences. Instead, staff were instructed to wait for students to offer their pronoun preferences themselves without being prompted.
In December 2022, Dr. Gene Sementi of RLR Consulting in Spokane provided the district his final report on a review of the district’s preferred pronoun usage. In his report, Sementi found that no La Center students had their Civil Rights violated by the directive Rosenkranz shared with staff members.
Despite that determination, the complaint was then forwarded to the La Center School Board and was addressed during a special meeting in January 2023, during which board members heard passionate testimony from teachers, students and citizens. The board reviewed the matter and also forwarded it to OSPI for review.
In February of 2025, the OSPI’s Equity and Civil Rights office ruled that the district violated state law by discriminating against students and staff based on gender identity with its pronoun policy and the district was ordered to comply with a more gender-inclusive policy. The district appealed that ruling.
In April 2025, the Trump administration launched an investigation into OSPI, citing allegations that the state directed the La Center School District to implement a gender inclusion policy that conflicts with federal law. The investigation put the 1,800-student district at the middle of the escalating battle between the U.S. Department of Education and the state Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction over approaches to inclusivity in schools. The Department of Education alleged OSPI was violating the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment, and Title IX, which prohibits sex-based discrimination in schools and education programs that receive federal funding.
In an interview last year with the Washington State Standard, Rosenkranz, said he was “very happy” to hear of the federal inquiry. He wanted the district to be able to focus on academics, but said “OSPI is trying to bully the La Center School District into submission,” with threats to withhold federal funding if school officials don’t follow state law.
How the Supreme Court ruling applies to the LCSD case
In a statement provided by the district Thursday, the district stated: “the constitutional questions discussed by the Supreme Court closely mirror the issues at the center of our ongoing case with the state of Washington. Following the Court’s decision, the Washington State Attorney General’s Office requested a 60-day extension in our administrative proceedings to review the opinion and consider its implications for Washington law.’’
“Every single case the Supreme Court led with in their reasoning is everything we have included in our case,’’ Rosenkranz told Clark County Today on Thursday. “We’re not out of the woods, but this is a good sign.’’
In the district’s statement, Rosenkranz added: “for more than three and a half years, our district has remained steady in one position: schools serve students best when they work in partnership with families. Parents are the primary decision makers in their children’s lives, and they deserve to be included in significant matters affecting their children’s development and well-being.
“Our position has never changed,’’ Rosenkranz said. “We believe schools should support students while respecting the role of families who know and love their children best. Strong schools and strong families are not in conflict; they are partners in the responsibility of educating their children.’’
Also read:
- Opinion: Supreme Court’s ruling should end state’s bullying of the La Center School District
Ken Vance argues a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling on parental rights in education could influence the ongoing dispute between the La Center School District and Washington state officials over gender pronoun policies. - Opinion: Neighbors for a Better Crossing urges Oregon Legislators to demand full audit of IBR project, echoing Washington’s HB 2669
Gary Clark of Neighbors for a Better Crossing urges Oregon lawmakers to pursue an audit of the Interstate Bridge Replacement project similar to Washington’s HB 2669 proposal. - Opinion: Climate Commitment Act – Washington’s hidden carbon tax hits hard
Opinion, columns, Washington state, Climate Commitment Act, CCA Washington, Washington carbon tax debate, Washington gas prices, Nancy Churchill, Dangerous Rhetoric, Washington climate policy, Washington fuel costs, Travis Couture, Washington Department of Ecology, Washington Department of Commerce, Washington carbon credit auctions, Washington cap and trade program, Washington environmental policy - Letter: The Missing Skamania Report – The prosecuting attorney is still sitting on it
Rob Anderson questions why an investigative report into potential County Charter and OPMA violations has not received an outside review after being declined by multiple offices. - Opinion: Washington’s charter schools deliver – if the state lets them
Vicki Murray argues that Washington’s charter schools are posting stronger academic results than comparable peers while facing funding inequities that are shrinking the sector.
