The Supreme Court on Monday issued an important order on its shadow docket in Mirabelli v. Bonta. The court granted an emergency appeal filed on behalf of Catholic parents by the Thomas More Society, blocking a state law that barred parental notification that their children had changed their gender identity.
I previously wrote about the case after heralding the decision of District Court Judge Roger Benitez, who wrote a powerful opinion in support of the rights of all parents. He wrote:
“The Attorney General on behalf of the State of California says Plaintiffs’ lawsuit is “properly understood as seeking a federal constitutional exemption from the California constitutional right to privacy, as applied to gender identity in the school context.” State Defs’ Oppo to Plaintiffs’ MSJ, Dkt 256, at 9. But the Attorney General gets it upside down. Plaintiffs do not ask the State to magnanimously permit a sort of federal constitutional exemption. What Plaintiffs seek is to force the State to respect their enduring federal constitutional rights as citizens of the United States.”
The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit stayed his injunction.
For years, some of us have been raising the attacks on parental rights. That is why this order is so notable.
I recently wrote about this fight in Michigan, where parents secured the right to sue to defend their rights against the Rockford Public School District. The District refused to inform them of gender identity changes in their children.
While it only restores the injunction during the pendency of the litigation below, it reflects a clear notion of the likelihood to prevail on the merits.
There remains ambiguity on where individual justices fall on the issues. The parents raised both free exercise and substantive due process challenges. Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas wanted to go further in ruling on the merits in favor of the parents.
In her opinion, Justice Amy Coney Barrett rules for the parents, not the teachers, in the case. In her concurrence with the Chief Justice and Justice Kavanaugh, she focuses most on explaining why a view in favor of substantive due process is consistent with the decision in Dobbs.
The three liberal justices — Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson — dissented. Justice Kagan decried the rejection of California’s priorities and objected to “throwing over its policies in a slapdash way.”
Justice Sotomayor was the only member of the Court who opposed all of the parents’ and teachers’ claims. Without writing a dissenting opinion, she would have denied their application in its entirety.
The decision puts even greater focus on another case.
Last year, I wrote about a startling decision in Foote v. Feliciano in which the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit ruled against parents in a similar challenge. Massachusetts parents Marissa Silvestri and Stephen Foote demanded notice of any gender identity change of their child after learning that the 11-year-old child had self-declared as “genderqueer.”
The First Circuit dismissed the challenge, holding “as per our understanding of Supreme Court precedent, our pluralistic society assigns those curricular and administrative decisions to the expertise of school officials, charged with the responsibility of educating children.”
The petition for review to the Supreme Court is now pending. Foote could allow the Court to reaffirm the fundamental rights of parents and, most importantly, clearly establish the standard for review in future cases.
The Court previously stated in Pierce v. Society of Sisters (1925) that “the child is not the mere creature of the State; those who nurture him and direct his destiny have the right, coupled with the high duty, to recognize and prepare him for additional obligations.”
It is time for the Court to back up that constitutional right with clear and robust protections.
Here is the opinion: Mirabelli v. Bonta
Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the author of the New York Times bestselling “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”
I remember the British writer Anthony Burgess, saying about 30 years ago that the most important political issue of the modern world was who controls our children – – parents or the government. He was prescient. It is one of those issues that defines you as being on the Left or the Right.
The salty dog in this case is religion. The objection was by a religious group and parent. The court threw out the religious group.
Historically religious groups and parents have harmed lgbt children by conversion therapy and some radical superstitious groups, believers in a Satan and demons, have thought lgbt children were demonic possession and have subjected the children to various harmful therapies and some children have committed suicide or have never moved forward without depression and poor self image. This superstitious belief and therapy is harmful and children may be authentically in fear of parents knowing.
Parents may also need therapy and secrets aren’t the best road forward. Referrals to child protective services are presumably standard practice?
I have not read the opinion. The opinion must include all children and not selectively religious families.
The salty dog in this case is religion…. I have not read the opinion. 1. Cosplay’s he/she/they/ze knows what the focus of the opinion was; 2. Confesses he/she/they/ze didn’t actually read the opinion.
These are the pedophiles in our schools demanding they have more right to American parents’ children than the parents themselves do. It’s a lot easier to be a unionized public school teacher and pedophile when you can hide what you’re doing from the parents.
Forbidden Fruit and the Classroom: The Huge American Teachers Union Sex-Abuse Scandal That Democrats Scandalously Suppress
https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2024/07/10/forbidden_fruit_and_the_classroom_the_huge_american_sex-abuse_scandal_that_educators_scandalously_hush_up_1042969.html?mc_cid=0d79030f05&mc_eid=febb5a4d8f
Do you slap and waterboard deaf mutes and insist they speak up, anon? Do you hide your Downs syndrome children, anon? Presumably so…
There is actual science these days. Wasn’t it Kant bridging the gap between science and superstition, rational v. Irrational, anon?
Davidson totally destroyed Kant, instead finding “non-rational” more appropriate than “irrational.”
Were you trying to impress? because it failed.
Epstein and his friends who owned teen beauty pageants didn’t have much access to schools.
Americans enjoy primary, fundamental, and superior constitutional rights and freedoms to direct the educations of their children per the 9th and 14th Amendments.
Parents enjoy the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment and shall not be discriminated against by being compelled to pay taxes for an education system they decline and do not use and by being compelled to pay twice for the education of their child when others are compelled to pay only once.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
AI Overview
Yesterday, March 2, 2026, the Supreme Court in Mirabelli v. Bonta ruled against California’s secrecy policies, the Court affirmed that parents are the “primary protectors” of their children and that the state cannot create a “parent-free zone.”
_______________________________________________________
AI Overview
The Ninth Amendment serves as a vital safeguard for unenumerated rights, ensuring that the Bill of Rights is not viewed as an exhaustive list of human liberties. Together with the Fourteenth Amendment, it provides the constitutional foundation for the fundamental right of citizens to direct the education and upbringing of their children. Under the Supremacy Clause of Article VI, these federal constitutional rights maintain absolute primacy and superiority over any and all state statutes. Consequently, any California law or policy—including those attempting to restrict parental notification or oversight—is secondary to the supreme authority of the Constitution.
This legal hierarchy was recently affirmed on March 2, 2026, when the U.S. Supreme Court blocked a 2024 California law (AB 1955) and related policies defended by Attorney General Rob Bonta that sought to prevent schools from notifying parents about changes to their child’s gender identity. In its 6-3 ruling in Mirabelli v. Bonta, the Court held that such “secrecy policies” likely violate parents’ constitutional rights to oversee their children’s care and mental health, effectively overriding the state’s attempt to mandate non-disclosure.
When will the Real-People realize that, It’s Over.
The only people that gained anything, Cheated, Lied, and had existential Privileges due to their proclivities.
Housing Prices and Property Taxes are insane. Factor in the: Electricity, Water, Internet, and Maintenance.
Seriously, no one can afford it anymore, and those that do have a home are sinking deeper and deeper into expenses that are eventually not sustainable.
The reality is that the system is broken (Bankrupt). War is no Bailout, a Bailout is no Bailout.
It’s very simple, It’s Over.
The upper half can well afford it, it’s over.
A slight modification to First They Came For: ‘first the came for my pocket book, then my children now I’m poor and without children. Now that’s the answer isn’t it?
Women were created to bear, nourish, teach, and prepare children to become worthy and valuable citizens.
Women have failed; they do little of any of that.
The American fertility rate is in a “death spiral,” currently 1.599, and more Americans die than are born.
There will be few-to-no Americans in 100 years.
If Americans don’t know precisely who Americans are, there are no Americans.
If it is the duty of men to fight their nation’s wars, it is the duty of women to bear their nation’s children.
If there is no duty, there is no nation.
If there are no resolute leaders, there is no nation.
The only heroes in war are the cowards who refuse to fight them.
Anon, that’s the product of affirmative action aka DEI. The next product are latch key children being reared by no one but themselves. No one knew that these results, consequences of equal opportunity would happen. It’s part of anthropology. The silence of women and shrouding is at the opposite end. Some cultures have killed off the intelligent females as they’re also a problem.
Then there’s always the problem of economics for bottom half families and latch key results. Women ultimately made a choice of career or children.
Men made a choice to allow women to make a choice of the demise of a population, which led to the demise of a nation.
Anon, no one knew that would happen.
How do you explain women who are successfully balancing child raising and careers? There are great models out there. What we should be be railing about are women not choosing smart life paths.
Loos like there is a push to divide the family unit and replace parents to make children wards of the state.
The children’s ‘trans issue’? There is big money in the drugs prescribed, the surgeries involved and the ensuing life long dependence on the medical industrial establishment.
I say suggesting to children that they are in the wrong body is a recruiting tool of twisted propagandists.
Is the sex revolution now so big a failure that CHILDREN must be propagandized & recruited to give the many forms of sexual perversion a future?
Looks to me this ‘grooming’ has become deadly. It must stop. Homosexual literature in CHILDREN”S libraries is so perverse rt can’t even be read aloud by parents at school board meetings is bad enough. Allowing drag queens to recruit children for ‘future use’ needs to stop as well.
Propagandizing to manipulate & /or recruit children must stop. To manipulate kids and break up families…is this another front used by those who want to tear down the US, then force the US into a New World Order government as a vassal state?
SamFox
Which group put the porn in the libraries? Duped teachers unions? What is the money trail? It’s bizarre and some awful dream by whom?
It may be the awful nightmare of the right wing in reality. The right can have a horrific fear of the lefts immorality.
Shouldn’t it be –> LGBTI. I is for intersex.
The most private things in life are strewn around like litter. It is quite amazing. It’s quite dangerous isn’t it. Think I’ll watch a commercial now about stuck 💩.
Forgive me but there is no decency is there.
Toodles
The birth rate for born Americans dropped below replacement way back in the 1970s.
If it weren’t for immigrants and their optimism, the US would have lost population.
BS
“These people are crazy.”
– President Donald J. Trump, SOTU, 2026
6 — 3
Last week, the so-called Supreme Court contradicted itself in front of God and everybody when something approaching half the court stated that the other half of the court was either (a) incorrect or (b) corrupt.
There is no, zero (0), possibility that intelligent and certified jurists can disagree at all on the English language and the law.
The dynamics are abject partiality and personal bias.
That is not a court; that is a circus.
That is a joke.
Have you considered that your comments apply mainly to the 3, and not to the 6? To explain what I mean, there is a possibility that two thirds of the Court are indeed “intelligent and certified jurists,” and the other three are loony-bins, especially Jackson who has proved it with her public comments.
Further proof is that “the three” ruled that parents don’t need to know what’s going on with their children in a vital area of their lives.
“If you’re half right, you’re half wrong; if you’re half wrong, you’re all wrong.”
-Anonymous American Sage
_________________________________
The Supreme Court is all wrong.
What so-called “court” seats or needs more than one judge?
There are appeals and the power of Congress to impeach and convict.
Slow down babalouie, put the shoe on the other foot. A parent with munchhausen is forcing the child to trans but has absolute right. The child dresses after getting to school. Tell the parents? A parent with absolute right cannot be taken to justice.
Fo you really think its likely that a parent with Munchausen wouldn’t be found out and prevented?
Yes, I really think that. They’d get a medal for effort. 😏
It does not matter. The standards is NOT parents must meet some standard of perfection or the state steps in.
It is Parents must be demonstrably criminal for the state to step in.
It would be nice if we had a magic want to assure all children had perfect parenting.
We don’t. What we do know is that bad parents – all but the very worst parents, are better than the state.
There is an estimated incidence of 0.5 cases of Munchausen syndrome by proxy (now often termed Medical Child Abuse) per 100,000 children under 16. There are laws against homicide, assault, battery, intoxication, and every other type of abuse and abusive neglect, etc., of course.
It happens. This case involves religion and religion can take the guise of superstitious demonic possession? The far right believes in a Satan and demons. Perhaps the lgbt children can be exorcised? Pretty much abuse.
The counter is there isn’t a Satan. There are many. 😂 . Women are demons unless shrouded and silenced, Mohammed? Kant tried to bring religion into the rational world. Lgbt are actual but the duty is not to act upon it because of morality and universality.
Toodles
I have no idea what you are arguing – but it is irrelevant. If some tiny fraction of parents beleive in demon possession – so be it.
That is NOT relevant. What is relevant is their conduct regarding their children Criminal. If not, the state must stay out.
That cuts both ways. I think parents that are Transing their kids are stupid, or even evil. But unless thay are guilty of sexual abuse, physical abuse or criminal neglects the state must stay out of it.
The presumption of control is with the parent.
When and ONLY when you demonstrate that the parent is a clear threat to the child – when they are physically abusing, or sexually abusing them – then and only then can the state interview.
You can not use differences over what you beleive are parenting best practices.
You MUST find that the parents conduct regarding their children is CRIMINAL to abridge parental rights.
This is not about some perfection ont he part of parents. It is that all but the very worst of parents are better than the state.
Charles Manson is what we get when the State raises children.
Agreed with everyone here who isn’t an anonymous troll. We would have laughed at this 20 years ago, it was high time, and it is probably sad we need the courts to bring basic sanity and common sense in line again. The past 18 years (*cough*Obama*cough*) have been madness.
Here in America we will take it back, and that does not make us ‘far right’, or even, ‘conervative’; just not subjugated Plebes. Anyone in opposition and not thoroughly beholden to ignorance, neglect, or ennui, should go to a less free place where inculcated thought and action is praised – just do it, expatriate, already, and leave us alone. That is not the USA, we believe in freedom and autonomy here. Personal responsibility too much for you to handle? Then leave. We will thrive without you. We are self-governing society and that means the a lot of breathing room. Without a free and solid citizenry we are not a society.
Frankly, someone like Vance is the most, ‘by the people, for the people’ person we’ve had in government in ages, even if I do not agree with all of his values, and I don’t. I have yet to see him impose, even if he expresses. The modern left is the opposite.
The rest of you – get bent and leave, if you hate an inordinately free society that much. France, Britain, or Germany will welcome you and your insularity with open arms. That is increasingly all of Western Europe. Just go. It likely will not go as well for you as you imagine in your frantic imaginations, unless you are so rich nothing touches you, and then, looking in the mirror is what is called for.
Grow up.
James,
I think that is the part of your comment that really needs to be highlighted: The difference between freedom, autonomy and forced conformity and having to be forced to accept a ideology. Kinda like comparing America to Iran. Ironically, it is the far-leftists that want to be more like Iran or the hardline part.
@Upstate
It is ironic in the extreme, and it is why I think modern liberals have empty heads (not the radical progressivism but the avowed ‘blue’ people). Even those of them who are intelligent people like your and my family, are living in a stupor that died 30 years ago, and I don’t know how we get them to even consider this. They do not seem willing or able to do it, despite the harping of literal years on our parts, and when it’s clear what the result of acquiescence is. This is before we get into all of the astroturfing, shady funding, and gaslighting.
“We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.”
– Non Natural Born Citizen and Ineligible Presidential Candidate Barack Obama, October 30, 2008
Abject, Absolute, and Irrefutable Sedition, Insurrection, and Treason.
Holy Moly! Well this will surely be revisited when President AOC, Shyster Schumer, and Tricky Dickey Durbin are running the country in 2029 and the American Communist 121st Congress agrees to PACK THE SUPREME COURT with like-minded legal geniuses that know the Constitution is a racist document drawn up by Slavers and Colonialists! Under American Communism the Elitist Community decides who is female, male, and nonbinary – to hell with gender biased Nature!
Whis is why we need the “Keep Nine” amendment to the Constitution, to fix the membership at 9.
1000000% agree.
Part of the problem with having 11-13 (or even more, as contemplated by Democrats) justices is that it could end up like Circuit appellate courts, which most often have “panels” of three justices,—- which then ends up being appealed all over again for an en banc decision. Can you imagine a SCOTUS docket like that?!!!!
Yes, an amendment is necessary so our eyes are not taken off the ball.
Article II, Section 2
The President shall…nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint…Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein other-wise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.
“But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”
– Declaration of Independence, 1776
“MINOR”
1. Does the Constitution confer authority over or control of children to parents or the government?
AI Overview
“The U.S. Constitution does not explicitly mention parents or children, but the Supreme Court has long interpreted the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause as protecting a fundamental right of parents to direct the “care, custody, and control” of their children.”
________________________________________________________________________________________________
2. There really is no question about schools taking action regarding a minor, such as any segment of the process of transgender transition, when the fact that the child is a minor is a clear legal statement that the child is under the control of the parent, in the exclusion of schools or any other entity.
AI Overview
“That is the precise argument at the heart of current constitutional litigation: if a minor is legally defined by their lack of autonomy and their presence under parental dominion, then a school
‘transitioning’ a child in secret constitutes a direct seizure of the parent’s 14th Amendment liberty.”
The core issue is NOT Gender. It is parental rights. It is who is in charge of kids under 18.
Many parents suck.
Most parents are far from perfect.
But the state is nearly always far worse.
John Say,
“But the state is nearly always far worse.”
The state has no responsibilities or accountability. How many times I have we seen the state drive something into the ground, and not a single person is held accountable? Even worse when children are involved. Get the “It is not my problem,” attitude or “We followed the law.”
The state does not love children. Most Parents do. Often badly.
Even so that makes all the difference.
My mother made signficant personal sacrifices to screw up my and my siblings lives – because she thought she was acting in our best interests.
She was wrong, but I never doubted that she loved us.
The state does not love anyone. The state does not nurture anyone.
They still don’t get the framing correctly – we’re all pretending that the children identifying themselves with opposite genders or bespoke genders are doing this organically and of their own accord. There is propaganda in the public schools pushing this – and no doubt children are seeing similar propaganda online and in other venues.
It’s not enough for parents to meekly request to be notified AFTER their child has been propagandized and set on a course towards heavy-duty drugs and surgeries. The public schools must – as a Constitutional matter – be made places which are not aggressively hostile towards broadly held cultural and religious norms.
AI Overview
“The classification of a person as a “minor” (typically anyone under 18) means that parents or legal guardians generally have legal authority, custody, and control over them until the child reaches the age of majority or is otherwise emancipated.”
It’s hypocrisy.
OT
“Iran has three friends: China, the Democrats, and the U.N.”
– Brigitte Gabriel, ACT For America
Did this conflict begin with AFDC , the State assuming financial responsibility of children and with public education itself as the State assumed financial responsibility for a child’s education? Is that a principle of harm? The State has assumed the role also in marriage and life v. Death and embryos in fertility clinics? Has public opinion assumed “it takes a village” and infringed upon individual rights?
The State gives and taketh away infringed freedom step by step. The public now thinks the State, the government gives individuals freedom. The answer to the conflict is the parents maintain all freedom regarding their personal offspring unless it’s a matter of life and death and the State covered that by presenting suicide. Parents are to be notified in cases of secrecy as suicide may happen under State secrecy for which the State can be held responsible for death of a child.
The public, the village does not infiltrate such matters by secrecy but notifies parents asap lest they face lawsuits. Frugal , always frugal …
🤦♀️ need an accounting of money spent on this crap asap.
^^^ Add to the list of harm Affirmative Action aka DEI. Harm defined as harm to freedom and that includes political and economic systems.
It’s become tribal and majority minority no longer function. Behavioral ecology view might help.
“Did this conflict begin with AFDC?”
This “conflict” began with the shredding of the Constitution by Abraham Lincoln, under whom “secession is not prohibited; therefore, secession is prohibited,” etc.
God Bless those who previously suffered under reprehensible slavery, but the Constitution has been incrementally shredded since Lincoln and to the current full-fledged communism extant in America today.
The American freedom, coherence, and rationality of its Founders persisted for a mere 71 years.
Unfortunately, Lincoln threw the baby out with the bathwater.
Parental rights at the expense of the rights of the minors. MAGAs once again asserting that parents have an unlimited right to abuse or kill their children. Disgusting.
Nothing be childless eh?
This is not about childrens rights – very few childrens rights are recognized.
Regardless, it is about who controls raising kids – the state or parents.
Parents are a bad choice, the state is nearly always far worse.
No one is killing kids – but the state is harming and multilating kids.
Secrets are deceptions. Parents are in the role as an enemy. Again, the reason suicide was brought in to increase State involvement as life and death when suicide exists as part of the diagnosis with or without the State.
Suicide is not a justification for State involvement.
Is there any evidence ever anywhere that the state has ever been able to do anything to reduce suicides ?
. . . asserting that parents have an unlimited right to abuse or kill their children.
What in the world are you talking about? You seem completely detached from reality.
It’s a child’s view, very limited to tictok info.
In the care and security of minor children, the state is subordinate to the parents. The state intervenes when parents fail. It does not replace them as the default guardian.
So, the annual parent-teacher conferences are merely opportunities for parents to abuse their children?
“How’s my Johnny doing?”
— Fine. But its Jill now.
As an aside, all appellate jurists are ethically held to render their decisions based on the law and facts before them (notwithstanding consideration of social trends and mores). It appears that all six Justices in the 6-3 majority in this case have children, adoptive or biological. It is hard to believe that they did not at least contemplate how they would feel if one of their children had assumed a different name and gender while at school, with which the school and fellow classmates complied, but withheld that information from the parent justices.
Conversely, two of the three dissenters (Kagan and Sotomayor) have never been married and do not have children……
Still, Kagan’s dissent is honest and removed enough:
“And then the Court grants relief by means of a terse, tonally dismissive ruling designed to
conclusively resolve the dispute. The Court does all this even though the application of existing law to the case
raises tricky questions, and so cries out for reflection and explanation.”
Sotomayor was married to her hs sweetheart for 7 years
I stand corrected. Thank you. But I had intended to say that they were not married and did not have children, not “never married.”
Typical lin, always commenting with factual errors.
I comment here fairly regularly.. Please cite at lease one other of my “always” factual errors. Thank you.
(yes, the above was a hurried and poorly-constructed sentence of mine that resulted in a factual error. Quite different from an intended factual misrepresentation, n’est ce pas?)
ha ha. I hurried again. Least, not lease ^^^^^
Lin,
Those of us with common sense knew what you meant.
Have the annonys ever been right about anything?
Lin made a good point. The party of self-extinction should not be defining parenting. That’s actually genocide.
Speaking of self extinction, Macron is getting his nukes in order and deploying laden jets to allied nations 😉.
Carpe diem.
Lin – the difference between “not married and no children” and “never been married and no children” is minor, and not at all material to the point you were making.
The commenter who pretended to believe it was some kind of glaring error has nothing but her own dishonesty. It’s little wonder she commented anonymously.
Your point is valid. The two no-children justices are liberal-left meaning they trust big government to take the role of parents, and they have a harder time understanding how parents’ constitutional rights might have been violated by California.
Voters themselves are mostly nonparents, at least in California. That sure wasn’t the case when I was a child. I don’t know statistics for other states. When these issues are put to voters, as they sometimes are, I’m fearful that voters these days will side against parents, too.
Which is why it’s so important that Scotus recognizes the foundational constitutional rights, which can’t be overturned by voters other than via constitutional amendment.
I guess I started this, but someone who married their hs
sweetheart and stayed with them for seven years has likely faced the issues around having children to a degree that the never-married simply haven’t.
It’s risky for type 1 diabetics like her to have kids, though. That might be why.
Lin made an insignificant error and corrected it.
I thought it was clear that she meant”were not parents”
Regardless, that is what people who are trustworthy due.
None of us are perfect.
But some of us never correct mistakes
Are parents also responsible for minors in the Epstein cases as the State has become the pimp encouraging minors?
The victory of Youngkin in Virginia should have taught liberals a lesson about messing with Momma Bear, but no, deviants and weirdos never learn. The only thing liberals learned from that is just lie about their intentions so they can get back in power. It worked because Spanberger and Jones won. There is no limit to how much some human beings can stink with decadence 🙁
Reminds me of a Star Trek episode in which Lazarus is forever locked in combat with his insane alter ago to prevent the lunatic from destroying the universe. That’s how politics feels all the time, now.
Guilty: Colin Gray of Georgia, and Jennifer and James Crumbley of Michigan, you should have known you child was going to be a murderer and your responsible for those murders.
On one hand you’re not entitled to know and on the other you should have known, what that’s called, duplicity maybe.
Yes, I just read Colin Gray was convicted of 2nd degree murder and manslaughter as the father having purchased a gun for his son, Colt Gray, age 14.
Was Colin Gray found guilty of conspiring with his son or did he drive the getaway car? The charges don’t fit the crime, GW?
Everything is AI absurdity.
It is a good reason not to have children. Why not make the parents liable for all of the crimes of their children?