George W. Bush Appointed Federal Judge Roger Benitez Strikes Down Democrat K-12 Lying to Parents pt3

Welcome to the Republican professor. I'm your host, Dr. Lucas J. Mather. Today is 17 March, 2026 years after Jesus. It's a Tuesday, and it is Street Patrick's Day. Happy Street Patrick's Day. We're back in Mirabelli versus Olsen, and I want to show you how to get there. This is the Roger Bonita's case, the decision at the trial court, federal in the state of California, where a George W. Bush appointee who is of Cuban descent, that is Roger Bonita's of much great fame in Second Amendment circles here in SoCal. Got this case and gave some rejudgment to the parents and the teachers who were fighting the Democrat indoctrination, great inflation plantations, we know as K through 12, public K through 12, where the Democrats had a policy that you should lie to parents about the health of their children, where they have converted in loco parentis to simply be just parentis. They think that they are the parents. And it was a Republican judge Roger Bonita's that said, no, not happening, not on my watch. Yeah, you can try that some other way. I like to go to the Thomas Moore Society.org. They have a breakdown of all the legal documents there. There's some pictures there, and you can get a summary there. The latest and greatest is a US Supreme Court order granting application to vacate the stay that the Democrats on the night circuit imposed after Roger Bonita's issued his December 22nd 2025 ruling. So that was March 22nd, 2026. The US Supreme Court got involved and basically affirming what we've been doing on the podcast since December 2025 and the work that we continue today. So just click view on the Roger Bonita's case, and you can get to page 18 where we left off at line 24. This is the third episode we've done, and we're going to work or working our way through this. It's rich material. Be sure to take a look at the first two episodes that we did in December of 2025 and in January, 2026. Let's get going here. Beginning where we left off at page 18, line 24, and this is the 22nd of December, 2025 order granting summary judgment and flavor of the favor of the plaintiffs, which is linked right here on the Thomasmoresociety.org. The third case study is a cautionary tale. While attending a California public school in 7th grade, their daughter Child Poe began exhibiting at school a significant change of identifying as a boy. The child's teachers were prohibited by school district policies from informing Child Poe's parents, and the pose remained oblivious. Meanwhile, the school accepted and perpetuated Child Poe's new gender expression. We're on page 19 now at the top. The plaintiffs expert and the state's experts agree that when a child expresses a new gender, it is a significant event. It may be a sign or a signal that a serious unhealthy condition of gender dysphoria may be occurring or is in the offing. It also may be that the child is fine. Like a child experiencing headaches and incongruous expression of gender may signal a serious medical condition needing interventional care and treatment, or it may be something that needs no treatment. In either case, our nation's laws normally respect the parents' rights and role of deciding whether further investigation should be pursued. Had they known of their child's new gender expression at school, the Poe parents, like most parents, would probably have sought an opinion from an expert like Dr. Brady. They may have pursued therapeutic counseling with Dr. Anderson. They may have asked a neuropsychologist to rule out other conditions or co-morbidities like generalized anxiety, depression, autism, or bipolar disorder, etc. The point is that had they known, the Poe parents would have had an opportunity to exercise their parental judgment in deciding what to do, as is their constitutional right under Parham, which is a case we covered last time. And their child would have received what the plaintiffs and all experts agree is the best for a child, at least the parent's involvement. Let me look at my notes really quick. At least the parent's involvement and perhaps like Regina, even the parent's support, but the Poe child did not get that support. She did not tell her parents, oh, did you see that? Did you see that? Now, this is why I love this. God bless Roger Benito's, man. Did you catch it? Remember, Democrats think that just as soon as you say you're a boy, you're a boy. Roger is not having anything of that. He says she did not tell her parents. Why did he say that? Because she says she's a boy. That's not what makes her a boy. It never has been that way. It never will be that way. It's not that way now. It's not that way in the past. It's never going to be that way in the future. As nothing to do with phobia, there's not necessarily any fear involved. Even if there was a little bit of fear or a lot of fear, why would that fear be a moral issue? Usually, when somebody has fear, the proper response is compassion. How can I help your fear? The label of phobia is not accurate. I think even people throwing it out there know it's not accurate. That's why they feel free to dismiss the normal, well, the norms around fear, which is compassion. They go into some weird moral judgment, even though it's incongruous with what would be a norm for responding to somebody in fear. My first foot forward when I see somebody in fear is unless I'm a drill instructor or unless I'm doing training in the military where somebody might die or something, I see somebody in fear. My role is compassion. That's part of what being a good person is. Well, you'll see that there's no compassion on this side. They're throwing the word fear out. It's just because it's the only word they were able to come up with and doesn't even make any sense. But for them, it doesn't matter if it makes sense. It just sounds good to them. So they're like, okay, it's phobia. Then they think that that somehow sticks and makes any sense given our norms of how to respond to somebody with fear. Of course, as soon as you point any of this out, assuming they have any attention span left after all their brain cells have been drained out of the Democrat campuses, and they've been cheating on their work and expecting great inflation. Good luck. Good luck getting any kind of normal conversation out of them because you're probably not going to get anything. They're probably just going to yell at you or something. It's like talking to a child, a spoiled child. It's odd. It's disturbing. So yeah, she did not tell her parents, the girl. The girl that thought she was a boy. Her teachers did not tell her parents. The school administrators did not tell her parents. Instead, in accordance with state policies, the school required secrecy from its teachers and employees while promoting her new name, her new name, whose new name, his new, no, no, her new name. She came up with a name and she thought I was a boy's name and that's what makes you a boy is when you have a boy's name. Now, that's not how it works. Any more than, you know, if I come up with a black name, it makes me black, whatever a black name or if I come up with a Chinese name, but now all of a sudden I'm Chinese. You know, yeah, that's not how it works. So there you go. Well, who knows? Who knows what else goes on? I mean, it's also true in the religion context just because you say your Christian doesn't necessarily mean you are one. There's other factors that go into the true conditions here rather than just what you say. Now, as it turns out, child pose change and gender expression was a tremendously significant sign. Yeah. Well, I have a little note here. Sorry, I got to go back to my notes. Line 13 here up here. What are these conditions that the child was at risk of generalized anxiety, depression, autism, bipolar disorder, etc. That's not even the entire list. I have in my notes the employees and teachers promoted her new name, promoted. That's a very strange activity for a teacher, very strange, promoted. It's just odd. It reminds me of an early TRP episode we did with Brenda Lebsack, who spent her entire career as a public school employee and in leadership on the school board in Orange County. That episode is called manufacturing the cues in LGBTQ manufacturing the cues, how the public school system takes it to be their political role to create cues where there were none before. That's a very important episode. I highly recommend you check that out. Now, as it turned out, we're on line 22, which is page 19, as it turned out, child pose change and gender expression was a tremendously significant sign. The Poe parents did not learn of their child's deteriorated mental health until after she attempted suicide. Lord have mercy. Adding insult to constitutional injury, California public schools as Rush Limbaugh used to put them still refused to use the child's given female name in spite of the Poe's parents' instructions. Wow, wow, wow, wow, wow. Dr. Sangeberg, and I don't know how to say that name. Like I said last time, S-Z-A-J-N-B-E-R-G. Not sure how to say it. I'm just going to say Sangeberg. Sorry, I'm sure I'm screwing that one up. Whoever you are, Dr. Sangeberg, I'm sorry. Dr. Sangeberg, after viewing child pose medical records, summarizes what went wrong. Page 20 at the top. The school knew that this girl had issues around, had gender issues, but let's not use the diagnosis yet. But gender issues and the school facilitated her transition from what they understood was their responsibility or their duty to transitioning to a different gender without informing the parents. That's the major issue I see here, and the school started their social transitioning in August 2022 without involving the parents. So this has been sort of a chronic repetition of keeping secret from parents, something this child was struggling with. And this child shows, this is a good example of a child who expresses issues about gender identity uncertainty or confusion, or coming to terms with it, with that then evolves into more serious gender dysphoria and even life-threatening gender dysphoria with all the associated diagnoses. Deposition of transcript of the Sangeberg at pages 106 to 107. Dr. Sangeberg continues, here is how I see this as a physician now. The school knew in August 22 that this girl was struggling with her gender. Oh, her! They did not inform parents for months the parents knew nothing about this, as you can see from the record. This girl, good job, good job, got sicker and sicker until she's hospitalized. Had they informed the parents hypothetically that the parents could have started working with the girl and with the school, with their therapist, so there would be no September hospitalization, there would be no series of multiple psychotropic drugs. My lord, there would not be a girl who was hallucinating. We could have prevented all of this. We wouldn't be sitting here today. Man, that's a powerful testimony. Brenda Lebsick was correct is what my notes say. This is what the Democrats do in California. The Republicans put a stop to it at the Supreme Court and on the lower court. The policy of acknowledging and perpetuating a child's gender incongruent name and pronouns is known as social transitioning. According to state defendants, parents, according to the state defendant's parent exclusion policies, when a student says he or she wants to be known by a new name or a pronoun, the school does not sit idly by. In an earlier order, this court described how the state defendant's policies require teachers and staff to immediately use a student's newly announced name and pronouns and record the new moniker's in school records. The state defendants do not dispute that the policies require formal recognition and perpetuation of a student's change in gender identity. Instead, they argue that it is, now on page 21, not social transitioning or if it is social transitioning, then it is not medical care. Rather, the state defendants explain that their policies are akin to a polite social courtesy. Yeah, if you believe that, I've got some land in the middle of the Pacific ocean. I'd like to sell you. I'll give you a great price. I'm telling you, I'll give you a great price. It's in the bearing straight. Yeah. Yeah. Okay, for example, the state defendants offer that. Sorry, I'm laughing at my own notes. I say bullshit. I say the cuss word. I was in that kind of a mood when I wrote that, I guess. Okay, for example, the state defendants offer that respecting a transgender person's request to be called by a name and pronouns consistent with their gender identity is far afield from anything that courts have recognized as medical treatment. Doing so involves no medical procedure, examination or hospitalization need not be performed by medical personnel. It is not regulated as a part of the practice of medicine. And that's state defendants opposition 32. The references are in the text. So I'll just let you look at those. Though the claim is intention with dough versus horns, footnote 38. Excuse me, 13 footnote 13. It is repeated throughout the briefing. Nevertheless, the secrecy aspect of the policy not only does not assist parents, it deprives parents of the opportunity to evaluate a significant medical sign and decide whether to pursue psychological counseling, psychiatric care, gender affirming care, family acceptance or something else. When these signs of a potentially serious conditions appear, it is the parents right and duty to investigate, evaluate and decide. Let me take a look at this footnote here. I'm going to skip footnote 9. Decide on whether to pursue health for medical or mental health professionals on page 22 at the top. The state defendants policies trample on the parents' plaintive substantive due process rights. Dr. Sonsberg describes the significance of a child's expression of gender incongruence like this question. You would agree that gender incongruence is in, sorry, excuse me, you would agree that gender incongruence in the absence of an impairment in functioning or a maladaptive behavior would not be considered gender dysphoria. That's a question. The witness, it depends. There's not a simple yes or no, there's not a simple yes or no for me. If you think of development, healthy development or illness development as a trajectory over time, it could be that gender something over here at this time period may be stable and continue on without any maladaptive disruption, or it could be that gender something or other is an early sign of medical illness like gender dysphoria. I think this example from child Poe is an example when she had her AVM malformation. In what I read, she, it actually bled into her brain. She would have had a headache. Now, headaches are not infrequent in kids in school, but most schools, I think, like my dad's school, if my kid has a headache, they would call me. They expect me to take care of it. If a school had decided, well, we don't want to call the parent over this headache, this girl could have died from her AV malformation. So most headaches don't go on to AV malformation. Those are really rare, in fact, but it shouldn't be up to the school alone to decide whether an early perturbation in development is going to evolve into something serious or as normal perturbation of development. That's a transcript of that Dr. Sangeberg at 70-72. Again, the citations are in the text. We're on the bottom of page 22 here. The constitutional question is not really really not whether expressing gender and congruence is a pathological or healthy or whether social transitioning is or is not a medical procedure. The debate is a red herring. We're on top of page 23 at the top. The constitutional question is about when gender and congruence is observed, whether parents have a right to be informed and make the decision about whether further professional investigation or therapy is needed. Put another way, the question is whether being involved in potentially serious medical or psychological decision making for their school student is a parent's constitutional right. It is. How refreshing. Thank you, Roger Benitez. Thank you. It is line 6, page 23. Quote simply because the decision of a parent is not agreeable to a child or because it involves risks does not automatically transfer the power to make that decision from the parents to some agency or officer of the state. Most children, even in adolescence, simply are not able to make sound judgments concerning many decisions, including their need for medical care or treatment. Parents can and must make those judgments, unquote. That's parham, 442 US at 603. Medically, it is also the preferred course of action. Dr. Sangerberg opines question. This is from the transcript, okay? Question. And how would that have occurred when child Poe is indicating that mom has rejected her for even a sexual orientation change? Answer. Look, this is my bread and butter as a psychiatrist. If I tell a parent, I think your child has major depression, they don't celebrate and say, thank you very much, I'm so glad. They usually have a reaction of, oh no, they try to deny it. They don't want to accept it. That's normal. So if I said a diagnosis of general anxiety disorder, they're not happy with the diagnosis. Just like any parent wouldn't be happy to be told, listen, we think your kid has Hodgkin's lymphoma, which is curable. They're not going to be happy about it, but you need to involve the parent in the illness treatment. Why make gender dysphoria separate kind of treatment than other medical treatment where we want the parents to be involved? We would want the parents to be involved. And if the parents are having trouble with it, that's our job as physicians or as therapists to help them through it. We don't tell them your kid has Hodgkin's lymphoma, we're not going to tell you we're just going to treat your kid without you're knowing about it in tough luck. We would never do that in medicine. On the top of page 24, question, same transcript, okay. Did you ever have, is a block quote from a transcript? Question, did you ever have an occasion, have occasion to treat youth who had been rendered homeless because they had disclosed that they identified by a different gender to their parents? Answer, that's my San Francisco job you're describing. Geez, too many of them. And right around eighth in market, that's where they lived, so to speak, too, so too many. Question, so that's a very real risk of disclosing gender identity to parents that the child would be rendered homeless? Answer. If you don't work with the parents, if you don't work with the parents, that's a risk. The school needs to work with the parents to prevent adverse outcome of any psychiatric diagnosis. If they say to a parent, your kid is very, very depressed and bring them to a doctor and the doctor says, no, it's really major depression. Then the parents and the doctor and maybe the school collaborate to accept the diagnosis and then treat the child well. Now that's a deposition, end of that, end of that quotation. The defense experts do not meaningfully disagree. Geez. Tough stuff, man. Dr. Christine Brady, PhD, is a psychiatrist who has treated a thousand gender in congruent youth, 100% of her current patients are transgender and gender non-conforming youth. As an expert for the state defendants, Dr. Brady opines, that everybody has a gender identity or a gender or has a gender. And so, that can sometimes be different from your sex. That can be aligned with your sex. Gender is just how you identify or don't identify with your sex. Sometimes a child mistakes his gender and a conversation with the therapist will help the child realize his mistake. Dr. Brady estimates that 20% of patients that think they want to socially transition later decide not to page 25 at the top. And of her own patients approximately 10% are on the autistic spectrum. To engage in social transitioning, Dr. Brady opines that a person need not see a mental health professional. On the other hand, she says that kids need support and if they are experiencing these mental health and if they're experiencing these mental health disparities. When she sees a youth at her gender clinic, she requires a parents or other caregivers involvement. Dr. Brady states in the context of gender clinic, in order to get gender clinic, you have to be out to at least one caregiver. When a child is young as five years old, she's, you guys let that sink in there. When a child is young as five years old decides to socially transition at school without the parent's knowledge and without the benefit of a psychological evaluation, Dr. Brady opines the benefits still outweigh the risks. But her opinion in this respect carries no weight because she concedes there are no studies. She concedes there are no studies to support her opinion, Dr. Brady testifies. But overall, I believe the benefits outweigh any potential risk that might be present, but the literature wouldn't indicate there is no risk. What literature is that? Question, what literature is that? Answer. The lack of evidence that indicates that there is a risk. There are no studies that show any data regarding risk. The percent of kids that identify as transition a transgender is quite small. And so running studies with that specific scenario in mind would be very hard to conduct. I'll note those studies do not exist in either direction regarding negative outcomes or benefits. Emphasis added and their italicized last sentence there. I'll note those studies do not exist in either direction regarding negative outcomes or benefits. Darlene Tando is another defense expert. Tando is a licensed clinical social worker with approximately 100 current clients most of which are transgender. I think it should be most of home. Approximately 30% or more for patients are on the autistic spectrum. Like patients of Dr. Brady in order to be seen in Tando's practice, a child's parents must first consent. Well, that's interesting. Like patients of Dr. Brady in order to be seen in Tando's practice, a child's parents must first consent. Tando says that the words gender and gender identity are synonymous and that they mean a sense of oneself for on page 26 at the top. Here's a quote. I consider the word gender to be synonymous with gender identity and I use them interchangeably. I believe it is the internal sense of self-psychological sense of self-identifying as male, female, all genders, both genders. No gender, unquote. Man, that is confusing. That is confusing as hell, man. She's these poor kids. Man. Okay. So she believes a child as young as three years old. Three years old can understand and assert their gender identity. While gender is not a medical condition according to Tando, she concedes that I think that a misalignment or an incongruence with one's designate sex and authentic gender identity, authentic, what makes it authentic could be considered a medical condition. Similar to other experts, Tando acknowledges that genders dysphoria can have effects ranging from unpleasant to life threatening. A trans identifying person who does not have gender dysphoria is at a greater risk of developing dysphoria if they do not receive proper support in affirmation according to Tando. And Tando observes that where a child is being referred to as a chosen gender in one environment, but not a different setting can be harmful and it can increase dysphoria and mental health risks. In her testimony, Tando agrees that it is important for parents to know in part because parents ultimately have the power to influence whether or not a child fully socially transitions. An apparent contrast to state policy makers. Okay, now this, you want to pay attention to this. This reveals the democrat grade inflation plantation. I mean, the fact that they're in charge of such a vast bureaucracy of grade inflation plantations is having an impact on whether they can even make arguments for their side. Now, if you have democrat judges who are just as great inflated, it might be that that won't matter because they just do whatever they want to do anyway. It doesn't have anything to do with epistemic norms or anything like that. Take a look at what Benita says, though, because he's obviously referring to epistemic norms here. In apparent contrast to state policymakers, Tando agrees that if parents believe their child would be harmed with social transitioning, the parents should be notified. Now, I say in apparent contrast to state policy makers because she's a defense expert, the defense is the state. There's supposed to be on the same side here. Hello, not surprisingly, Tando notes that a parent's role in understanding their child's behavior is important and her book says that parents are the best historians of behaviors, which is extremely beneficial to the course of treatment, adding it is an essential role in the journey. Tando testified, I believe it's optimal for parents to understand and affirm the child's gender identity. And she agrees that parents will do everything they can to help their children, even if they're initially shocked. Parents may be shocked at first, but Tando agrees that because parents want the best, want what is best for their child, they will likely support and affirm the child. In fact, Tando says that it is normal for parents to not respond positively to their child telling them that they are transgender and that the reaction does not mean that the parent is a bigot, hateful, or abusive. Well, thank you so much, Darlene, for that. Thank you so much. Tando concluded her deposition testimony by disagreeing with other experts and opining that even where parents object or have instructed a school not to affirm their child's preferred identity, quote, I think it would still be beneficial to the child to be referred to appropriately in one context, unquote. Okay, I don't know what that means, but okay, in contrast, Dr. Erica Anderson, PhD, former member of the Board of Directors of WPATH, I don't know what that stands for. Was that defined earlier? I can't remember. Says that quote, it's hard to imagine any circumstances under which it is a good idea to socially transition a child without the support of parents, unquote. Dr. Anderson is a clinical psychologist who sees patients who are gender questioning or transgender for evaluation and impossible treatment. Gender identity persistence is one of recurring issues in her work, quote, it is this child likely going to persist in this transgender identity or a different gender identity, and that's a that's a sticky wicket trying to figure that out, unquote. Parental support for children is important for a child's health according to Dr. Anderson. I feel like I'm in the matrix for a second. Children deserve the support of adults, especially parents, and that's what I've understood as a psychologist, and the scientific literature confirm that children grow up healthy and happy when they are supported by adults and the caregivers in their lives. Dr. Anderson holds the opinion that schools should bring to a parents' attention issues of their child's gender dysphoria. Dr. Anderson testifies children, children of things that go on at school that parents are notified about all the time. There are probably thousands and thousands of such notifications going on throughout California schools today. If a child falls on the playground and scrapes their knee and gets some kind of first aid, the parents are notified. If a child needs to take medication at school for any reason, patients are notified. That's a typo. I found another typo. Yes, yes, I love it when I find typos. Clerk of the court, this is the second typo I found, clerk. Okay, parents are notified on page 27 at the bottom in the block vote, and on page 28 at the top of the same block vote, it says patients are notified. It should be parents are notified. All right, okay, I'm watching you, federal court reporter. If a child is failing in their academic performance, schools or parents are notified, I'm not persuaded that this is a reason to carve out, that there's a justification to carve out a social transition, which is not a neutral act. It's a psycho therapeutic intervention, and I'm not persuaded that school people at school are qualified to to determine, does this child suffer from gender dysphoria or not, or are there other psychological factors at play? That is really to be brought to the attention of of parents and or parents to intervene as the guidelines, the very guidelines that Dr. Brady and Ms. Tando use recommend, that social transition can be done with the concurrence of parents, nowhere in any guidelines I have come across advice to school people that they should go ahead and socially transition kids without notifying their parents. Sounds like she understands what in-locoparentus means, and doesn't mean just parental, you're the parents now. I'm sure that that's not chromatically correct Latin, but all right, let's let's keep going here. Lastly, Dr. Anderson said that she has had discussions with Dr. Cass, author of the most comprehensive review of scientific literature on transgenderism and social transitioning, and said, quote, we agreed that, you know, as put in the report, social transition is not a neutral act, and it should be done selectively and carefully. Unquote. The state defendants own experts say it's good if a child's gender expression is affirmed, which is facilitated in school. However, the parental exclusion policies presume that a child will not receive affirmation or support at home if parents are informed over the child's objection. Consequently, the state privacy policies assume that one half loaf of bread is better than no loaf at all. In other words, it is better to give at least some school affirmation for a non-conforming gender student, even though school secrecy means the child is deprived of the opportunity to receive parental affirmation. The counterargument to that is if parents are not informed at all, there will be gender and congruent children that would have been affirmed by their parents, had the parents been informed, but who will instead be forced to struggle without their parents involvement? I only have one note on page 28, and that is in the quotation here. The quotation here, Dr. Anderson says, we agree with Dr. Cass that social transition is not a neutral act. Yes, that's true. It should be done selectively and carefully. I don't agree with that, but this is not my quote. This is her quote. I have in my notes it should be done if at all, selectively and carefully, if at all, and I would have put if at all. So the counterargument is that if parents are not informed at all, there will be gender and congruent parents that would have been affirmed by their parents, had the parents been informed, but who will instead be forced to struggle without their parents involvement, page 29 at the top and affirmation. Okay, the group of school children will be deprived of the whole loaf of affirmation. Along the same lines, that group of school children will be deprived of their parents' wisdom and opportunities to act in the child's best interest, such as exploring counseling with the mental health expert, family discussions, or simply patient observation over time. These school children will not have the benefit of their parents' involvement at all. In other words, while these state privacy policies may be intended to protect a gender and congruent student, it may have the actual effect of depriving that student of what they need most and what is clinically the best affirmation and support from their own parents. As for whether gender and congruence is an unhealthy medical condition and need of treatment or whether social transitioning at school as a medical treatment does not matter. Under the 14th amendment, parents have a substantive due process right to know of and explore whether their own child's gender and congruence is a medical or psychological condition and whether and what kind of treatment or approach is in their child's best interests. The state defendants expert say that a child's gender identity is innate. There is no evidence presented to back up that assertion, but even if there is a question, it is best answered by parents taking the child to a mental health provider to explore the question instead of leaving a child to answer the question of his or her own. This court has previously described the longstanding and enduring rights of parents to direct the upbringing and medical care of their children. That right has been acknowledged by the US Supreme Court once again in Mahmoud versus Taylor. That's citing the Supreme Court reporter 145 Supreme Court at 2332 2025. There are no genuine issues of material fact. The plaintive parents are not claiming that the 4th amendment gives them a right to prescribe school curriculum or force the schools to administer medical care or disclose student private personal information to unrelated adults. The court holds that a parental right to be informed about the gender identity expressed within the schoolhouse gate of one's child lives comfortably within the limits of the 14th amendment. There are no genuine issues of material fact. We're on line 4 of page 30. By their policies of social transitioning and secrecy from parents and by stifling teachers who would voluntarily talk with parents about the incongruent gender expressions of their children at school, the parent plaintiffs had proven that the state defendants policies significantly in fringe on the federal constitutional right of the parent class members as a matter of law, and the parent class members are entitled to a permanent injunction. Wow. That's great. I remember reading this in Jackson, Tennessee. Oh my gosh. There's more. We're on B. Parents First Amendment Free Exercise Rights. Starting at page 30, line 10. I read this previously in Jackson, Tennessee 836 PM Wednesday 24 December 2025 years after Jesus. That's Christmas Eve. I was smoking a foundation Tabernacle Havana seed number 142 from Ye old pipe shop in Jackson. I think I also lit up an Oliva number 3 and I was having Dickel, Tennessee Sourmash. It was a 20-buck chuck at the local establishment there in Jackson. So yeah, we'll get to parents First Amendment Free Exercise Rights next time. We also have the teachers to consider. So we have at least two more episodes at least. I don't think we'll be able to get through the rest of it because it's 52 pages and we're on page 30. We're doing about 10 pages a day and I don't think it's good to rush through this. Thanks for joining me on the Republican Professor podcast. I've been your host and I've also been my own host is the thing. Let's dedicate this time to the Lord. Let's have a little chaplain's corner. Thank you Father for this ruling from Judge Roger Benitez. Lord, we ask that you would protect him and provide richly for him. Lord, we ask that you would provide us with a suitable replacement when he retires. We ask that you would give our nation's leaders wisdom and calmness and endurance. Lord, that you would speak to their spirits about what to do and how to do it to make America a good place to live and to help us be a light to the nations, to develop into a more flourishing country. Help us to help others and we ask that we would shine your light into the future. Help us solve these intractable problems. Give us the attention span that we need. Holy Spirit, we ask for your illuminating epistemic light on our souls that we would be able to know, to understand the times and know what to do. Lord Jesus, thank you for what you've done living a perfect life, providing a perfect sacrifice for us on the cross, a propitiation for our sins. We know that it's only through you on your authority that we stand redeemed and guiltless before the Lord. Thank you for being a light to us showing us how to live and we ask that you would help us live the everlasting resurrected life. Live into that right now. We thank you for the resurrection, Lord. Holy Spirit, Father, Lord Jesus, we're so grateful for what you have done in history and continue to do and and through us. In Jesus' name, amen. Catch you guys next time. Take care. God bless.