• The U.S. Supreme Court will hear a case challenging a Washington State policy that bars parents from being notified if their child runs away if that child identifies as transgender.
• Sutherland Institute filed a brief urging the Court to take the case.
• Government should not interfere in the parent-child relationship unless there is evidence the parent is unfit. Washington’s current policy assumes parents are unfit without evidentiary support.

The U.S. Supreme Court recently decided to take a case, International Partners for Ethical Care, Inc. v. Ferguson, challenging a Washington State policy that interferes with parents’ ability to help their vulnerable children. The court will consider the challenge in its October 2026 term.

Sutherland Institute filed a brief encouraging the court to take this case because of its implications for parents, but also for religious freedom. Parents want to protect their children, and religious parents see that obligation as a key responsibility of their faith.

Washington state has a policy that when children who have run away from home are in the state’s custody, it will notify the parents unless there is reason to believe the parents pose a threat to the child. More recently, the state adopted an exception. It now assumes that a parent should not be given notice when their child runs away and identifies as transgender, even if there is no evidence the parent is unfit. 

Governments should not interfere with parents’ relationships with their children unless the parents are unfit. The Washington policy being challenged in this case turns that principle upside down. It assumes that certain parents are unfit without requiring any evidence that the charge is justified. 

Sutherland will continue to encourage the court to clarify that caring and conscientious parents should not be excluded from their child’s life just because the government has a different idea about how that child should be raised.