International Partners for Ethical Care v. Ferguson
Case Snapshot
Washington state requires youth shelters to hide a runaway child’s whereabouts from parents when the child seeks a “gender transition,” then allows state officials to steer the child toward transition services and delay any return home. When concerned parents challenged the law, lower courts said it was too early—they didn’t know when their children might run away and be hidden from them. Becket is asking the Supreme Court to let parents defend their families in court before the state takes their children away.
Status
On September 15, 2026, Becket filed a friend-of-the-court brief on behalf of Mary and Jeremy Cox, Catholic parents in Indiana whose son was removed from their home after they would not refer to him using pronouns and a name inconsistent with his biological sex. Drawing on the years they lost with their son, the Coxes are asking the Court to spare other parents from watching the government tear their family apart.
Share this Case
Case Summary
Washington puts bureaucrats in the parents’ place
For decades, Washington law required youth shelters to quickly notify parents when a runaway child arrived, including telling them where their child was. An exception allowed shelters to withhold that information when contacting the parents could expose the child to abuse.
In 2023, Washington expanded that exception to runaway children seeking a “gender transition,” even when their parents have not abused or neglected them. In those cases, youth shelters must withhold the child’s whereabouts from the parents and notify the Washington Department of Children, Youth and Families instead. State officials can then steer the child toward services that support that transition and delay the child’s return home with no set deadline. In effect, Washington now treats loving and fit parents the same as neglectful or abusive parents simply because the state disagrees with their beliefs about human sexuality and gender.
Parents are locked out of court
A group of Washington parents challenged the law, arguing that it threatens their right to raise their children according to their deeply held beliefs about human sexuality and gender. Four of the five families have children who struggle with gender dysphoria, one child has run away before, and some parents say the law has already changed how they discipline and talk with their children—because they fear what could happen if their child runs away.
But the lower courts did not allow the parents’ challenge to the law to move forward. Instead, they ruled that the parents could not sue because the threat to their families was not immediate enough. The parents asked the Supreme Court to let them challenge the law, arguing that they should be able to go to court before—not after—the government comes between them and their children.
The Cox family is living proof of what is at stake
Mary and Jeremy Cox know firsthand the heartbreak of having the government take away their child. The Catholic couple’s son was removed from their home after they did not support his desire to live as a female. Even after officials determined that the Coxes were fit parents, he was never returned to their home before turning 18.
The Coxes spent years trying to defend their parental and religious freedom rights in court, but procedural hurdles kept them from getting a real chance to vindicate those rights. Washington’s law goes even further: parents get no chance to object before the state keeps their child away from them. Becket’s friend-of-the-court brief on behalf of the Coxes argues that parents must reach a courtroom before the government can inflict that lasting harm.
Importance to Religious Liberty:
- Parental Rights: Parents have the right to direct the religious upbringing of their children. Teachings around family life and human sexuality lie at the heart of most religions, and Becket defends the right of parents to guide their own children on such matters.