In a recent development, California Governor Gavin Newsom, a Democrat known for his advocacy for LGBTQ+ rights, has vetoed a bill that aimed to make significant changes to the way judges consider child custody cases in the state. The bill, known as AB 957, sought to require judges to take into account whether parents affirmed their child’s gender identity when determining custody arrangements. Despite the bill’s noble intentions, Governor Newsom’s veto has sparked a contentious debate about the role of the Executive branch in dictating legal standards for the Judicial branch and the best way to protect transgender and gender-diverse children.
The Proposal:
AB 957, originally introduced by Democrat Assemblywoman Lori Wilson, aimed to introduce a crucial consideration into the child custody process. The bill proposed that courts deciding custody cases must factor in whether each parent affirmed the child’s gender identity. An amendment in June broadened the scope to include a parent’s affirmation of their child’s gender identity as part of the state’s standard for parental responsibility in court proceedings concerning the child’s health, safety, and welfare.
Governor Newsom’s Decision:
Despite his history of support for LGBTQ+ rights, Governor Newsom chose to veto AB 957. In his statement, Newsom emphasized his appreciation for the bill’s intentions and the passion behind its introduction. However, he voiced concerns about the Executive and Legislative branches dictating prescriptive terms for the Judicial branch to apply. The governor expressed the fear that such an approach could potentially be exploited to diminish the civil rights of vulnerable communities. Newsom also noted that existing law already required courts to consider a child’s health, safety, and welfare when determining custody, including the parent’s affirmation of the child’s gender identity.
Assemblywoman Lori Wilson’s Response:
Assemblywoman Lori Wilson, who coauthored the bill with Democrat state Senator Scott Wiener, expressed disappointment with the governor’s veto. She argued that the bill was intended to give transgender, gender-diverse, and intersex children a voice in family court proceedings. Wilson believed that a non-affirming parent could have a detrimental impact on a child’s mental health and well-being, emphasizing the importance of affirming and supporting these children, especially within the family court system.
Scott Wiener’s Perspective:
Senator Scott Wiener, known for his staunch support of LGBTQ+ rights, also expressed disappointment with the governor’s decision. He labeled the veto a “tragedy for trans kids” who often face fear and discrimination. Wiener emphasized that the bill was designed to ensure that courts considered a child’s gender identity and the parent’s support for the child when making custody decisions, rather than tormenting them.
Conclusion:
The veto of AB 957 by Governor Gavin Newsom has sparked a heated debate about the balance of power between the Executive and Judicial branches, as well as the best way to protect the rights and well-being of transgender and gender-diverse children in child custody cases. While the bill aimed to affirm and protect these children, Newsom’s decision suggests a cautious approach to legislative involvement in the judicial process. This issue highlights the ongoing struggle for LGBTQ+ rights and underscores the importance of finding common ground and effective solutions to support vulnerable populations within the legal system.
