The Supreme Court cleared the way Monday for California schools to tell parents if their children identify as transgender without getting the student's approval, granting an emergency appeal from a conservative legal group.

The order blocks for now a state law that bans automatic parental notification requirements if students change their pronouns or gender expression at school.

The split decision comes after religious parents and educators challenged California school policies aimed at preventing schools from outing students to their families. Two sets of Catholic parents represented by the Thomas More Society say it caused schools to mislead them and secretly facilitate the children's social transition despite their objections.

California, on the other hand, argued that students have the right to privacy about their gender expression, especially if they fear rejection from their families. The state said that school policies and state law are aimed at striking a balance with parents' rights.

The high court majority, though, sided with the parents and reinstated a lower-court order blocking the law and school policies while the case continues to play out.

"The parents who assert a free exercise claim have sincere religious beliefs about sex and gender, and they feel a religious obligation to raise their children in accordance with those beliefs. California's policies violate those beliefs," and burden the free exercise of religion, the majority wrote in an unsigned order.

The court's three liberal justices publicly dissented, saying the case is still working its way through lower courts and there was no need to step in now. "If nothing else, this Court owes it to a sovereign State to avoid throwing over its policies in a slapdash way, if the Court can provide normal procedures. And throwing over a State's policy is what the Court does today," Justice Elena Kagan wrote.

Conservative Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas, meanwhile, noted they would have gone further and granted teachers' appeal to lift restrictions for them.

The Thomas More Society called the decision "the most significant parental rights ruling in a generation."

California Gov. Gavin Newsom's office defended the law, saying teachers should be focused on instruction, not required "to be gender cops."

The order "undermines student privacy and the ability to learn in a safe and supportive classroom, free from discrimination based on gender identity," said Marissa Saldivar, a spokesperson for the Democratic governor.

The Supreme Court has ruled for religious plaintiffs in other recent cases, including allowing parents to pull their children from public-school lessons if they object to storybooks with LGBTQ+ characters.

The California order comes months after the court upheld state bans on gender-identity-related healthcare for minors. The justices also seem to be leaning toward allowing states to ban transgender athletes from playing on girls sports teams.

School policies for transgender students, meanwhile, have also been on the court's radar in other cases. The court rebuffed another similar case out of Wisconsin in December, but three conservative justices indicated they would have heard the case. Justice Samuel Alito called the school policies "an issue of great and growing national importance."

The justices have been weighing whether to hear arguments in cases out of states like Massachusetts and Florida filed by other parents who say schools facilitated social transition without informing them.

The Trump administration, meanwhile, found in January that California's policies violated parents' right to access their children's education records. The Justice Department also sued after determining the states' transgender athlete policies violate federal civil rights law.

A Brazilian au pair who fell in love with an IRS agent pleaded guilty to manslaughter on Tuesday in what prosecutors say was an elaborate double-murder scheme to frame another man in the stabbing of his wife.

For months after the killings on Feb. 24, 2023, it might have seemed as if Juliana Peres Magalhães and the IRS agent, Brendan Banfield, got away with murders, according to new details prosecutors revealed in court to support her guilty plea.

Christine Banfield, a pediatric intensive care nurse with a 4-year-old daughter, had been mortally wounded with stab wounds to her neck, and Brendan Banfield, her husband, and their live-in nanny both said they shot her apparent killer — a man who had been lured to the bedroom with promises of rough sex.

Magalhães had called 911 to the house in Herndon, Virginia, and was hyperventilating at the scene as she described the killings. Detectives weren’t buying it — but it took time to build their case. Meanwhile, the live-in au pair moved into the primary bedroom with Banfield and posted photos of them as a couple, authorities said. When she was arrested in October 2023, a picture of herself with Brendan Banfield was on the nightstand.

As she remained in jail for more than a year thereafter, she declined to say anything more.

A long-awaited forensics report on the blood spatter evidence then came in, and prosecutors said it showed that Brendan Banfield had smeared blood from Christine Banfield’s wounds onto the body of Joe Ryan, the man they had tried to frame for stabbing her. Authorities arrested Brendan Banfield in September on charges of aggravated murder.

Banfield’s lawyer, John F. Carroll, said in court before he was denied bail in September that the evidence “just doesn’t add up” to him killing his wife.

In October, Magalhães agreed to cooperate with the police in her second interview since the day of the crime. Days later, on Tuesday, two weeks before she was scheduled to go to trial on charges of second-degree murder and felony firearm use, Magalhães pleaded guilty to Ryan’s killing, saying she had agreed to help the husband’s ruse to kill the wife and make it look like they both shot a predator.

“Are you entering your guilty plea because you are in fact guilty of this offense?” Chief Judge Penney Azcarate asked Magalhães before accepting her plea to a single count of manslaughter, reduced from murder and a firearm offense.

“Yes,” she replied, softly.

The sentencing of Magalhães, who was raised in the outskirts of Sao Paulo, now awaits the conclusion of Brendan Banfield’s trial. Depending on her cooperation with authorities, attorneys said in court that they may agree for her to be sentenced to the time she’s already served.

“Much of the information that led to this agreement cannot be made public at this time, due to the upcoming criminal trial against the other defendant in this matter,” Fairfax County Commonwealth’s Attorney Steve Descano said.

A South Korean court found the former police chief of the country’s capital and two other officers not guilty over a botched response to a Halloween crowd crush that killed nearly 160 people in 2022.

The verdict by the Seoul Western District Court drew angry responses from grieving relatives and their advocates, who accused the court of refusing to hold high-level officials accountable for an incident that was largely blamed on a lack of disaster planning and an inadequate emergency response.

Kim Kwang-ho, former chief of the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency, was the most senior police officer among more than 20 police and government officials indicted over the crush in Itaewon, a popular nightlife district in Seoul. Prosecutors had sought a five-year prison term for Kim.

An investigation led by the National Police Agency found that police and local officials failed to plan effective crowd control measures even though they expected more than 100,000 people to gather for Halloween events in Itaewon.

The investigators found that Seoul police assigned just 137 officers to Itaewon on the day of the crush. Police also ignored hotline calls placed by pedestrians who warned of swelling crowds before the surge turned deadly. Once people began getting crushed in an alley near Hamilton Hotel, police failed to establish control over the site and allow paramedics to reach the injured in time.

Some experts have called the crush a “manmade disaster” that could have been prevented with relatively simple steps like employing more police and public workers to monitor bottleneck points, enforcing one-way walking lanes, and blocking narrow pathways.

The Seoul court acquitted Kim of professional negligence, saying that prosecutors failed to prove that he had violated his duties or to establish a connection between his conduct and the high toll of deaths and injuries. The court also acquitted two lower-ranking police officers who faced similar charges.

The court stated that while Kim received status updates from various departments in his agency and the Yongsan police station about the situation in Itaewon before the crush on Oct. 29, 2022, this information would not have been sufficient for him to recognize the possibility of an incident of such magnitude.

The court also noted that Kim had instructed various police stations in Seoul, including Yongsan, to establish plans to maintain safety during Halloween celebrations.

“Based solely on evidence submitted by prosecutors, it’s insufficient to conclude that the defendants’ professional negligence and its relationship to the occurrence or escalation of this incident are fully established beyond reasonable doubt,” the court said in a statement. Relatives of the victims embraced and cried outside the court after the verdict was announced.

“This court just granted immunity to the police for whenever these kinds of incidents happen again!” one of them shouted. Others scuffled with security as they tried to approach Kim’s car as he left the court.

Itaewon Disaster Bereaved Families, a group representing the victims, said the ruling was “dishonest” and “impossible to understand” and called for prosecutors to appeal.

“We strongly condemn that the main officials of the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency, who ignored their duties for prevention, preparation and response despite anticipating that a large crowd would develop, and who have been denying their responsibility until now, are being given a free pass,” the group said.

The same court last month sentenced the former chief of Yongsan police station, Lee Im-jae, to three years in prison and convicted two of his colleagues of professional negligence resulting in death, citing their failure to properly prepare for the crowd and respond to the crush.

The court acquitted Park Hee-young, head of the Yongsan ward office, and three other ward officials, saying that they had no legal authority to control or break up crowds.

Lee and another Yongsan police official who received a one-year sentence appealed the ruling earlier this month. The other police official had received a suspended sentence.