Let’s Talk - Lozano Smith Podcast

In this episode, host Sloan Simmons joins Student Practice Group Co-Chair Ruth Mendyk and student practitioner Rebal Halabi-Boutros for the year’s annual student legislation round-up.  Ruth and Rebal discuss the most significant bills passed by the close of this year’s legislative session and their impacts going into 2026. Show Notes & References 1:34 – New laws related to immigration enforcement (Assembly Bill (AB) 49) (See Client News Brief 41 - October 2025) 3:54 – Judicial vs. administrative warrants (See Attorney General Guidance) 4:43 – Immigration enforcement and the impact on average daily attendance (ADA) (AB 1348) 5:40 – Comprehensive school safety plans (Senate Bill (SB) 98) (See Client News Brief 41 - October 2025) 7:08 – Family Preparedness Act (AB 495) (See Client News Brief 46 - November 2025) 10:56 – Identification cards (AB 727) (See Client New Brief 54 - November 2025) 12:21 – Homeless students and health screenings (AB 677) (See Client News Brief 54 - November 2025) 13:22 – Smartphone use and the emergency exception (AB 962) (See Client News Brief 53 - November 2025) 17:50 – Antisemitism and discrimination (AB 715 and SB 48) (See Client News Brief 43 - October 2025) 20:54 – Prichett et al. v. Newsom et al., U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, Case No. 5:25-cv-09443-NW 23:00 – Governor Newsom's statement on AB 715 and SB 48 (October 7, 2025) 23:16 – Graduation ceremonies and student adornment of cap and gown (AB 1369) (See Client News Brief 44 - October 2025) 28:11 – Cyberbullying (AB 772) (See Client News Brief 53 - November 2025) 33:43 – Readmission following expulsion (AB 1230) (See Client News Brief 58 - December 2025) 35:47 – Truancy (AB 461) (See Client News Brief 58 - December 2025) 38:24 – Diwali added to list of state holidays (AB 268) (See Client News Brief 58 - December 2025)   For more information on the topics discussed in this podcast, please visit our website at: www.lozanosmith.com/podcast

In this episode, host Sloan Simmons joins Title IX experts Sarah Fama and Sinead McDonough for a comprehensive discussion regarding the status of the law as it pertains to gender identity, students, and schools.  Topics covered include the current status of California and federal law and policy on point, as well as the wide-ranging scope of pending litigation poised to impact this area of school law. Show Notes & References 1:54 – Foundational cases impacting Title IX policy (Bostock v. Clayton County (2020) 140 S. Ct. 1731) (Client News Brief 50 - June 2020) 2:55 – Grabowski v. Arizona Board of Regents (9th Cir. 2023) 69 F.4th 1110 5:51 – Parents for Privacy vs. Barr (9th Cir. 2020) 949 F.3d 1210 (Client News Brief 40 - May 2020) 10:48 – Roe vs. Critchfield (9th Cir. 2025) 137 F.4th 912 (Client News Brief 14 - April 2025) 12:49 – Jones, et al. v. Critchfield, et al., Ninth Circuit Case No. 25-5413 13:44 – Regino vs. Blake (formerly Staley) (9th Cir. 2025) (Client News Brief 17 - April 2025) 14:57 – Assembly Bill (AB) 1266 20:00 – United States v. Skrmetti (2025) 605 U.S. 495 22:24 – The law in California 23:25 – CIF (California Interscholastic Federation) Rule 300D and Guidelines for Gender Identity Participation 24:36 – Interactions with federal law 25:56 – Executive Order (EO) 14168 (Client News Brief 12 - February 2025) 27:01 – Tennessee v. Cardona decision 28:29 – Dear Colleague letter - February 4, 2025 30:32 – Federal government's approach and reaction to CIF and AB 1266 (USDOE Press Releases: February 12, 2025; March 27, 2025; June 25, 2025) 34:00 – Related Supreme Court cases (Little v. Hecox, Case No. No. 24-38; West Virginia v. B.P.J., Case No. 24-43) 35:09 – T.S. et al. v. Riverside Unified School District et al., U.S.D.C., Central District of California, Case No. 5:24-cv-02480-SSS-SP, and order on motion to dismiss, (C.D. Cal. Sept. 24, 2025) 2025 WL 2884416 36:25 – Protections for student privacy and their interactions with parental rights 39:22 – Mirabelli vs. Olson et al.¸U.S.D.C., Southern District of California, Case No. 3:23-cv-00768-BEN-VET 40:00 – The SAFETY Act (AB 1955) 44:13 – The dynamic between the federal government and California post-AB 1955 enactment (United States of America v. California Interscholastic Federation et al., U.S.D.C., Central District of California, 8:25-cv-01485-CV-JDE) 50:26 – Foote v. Ludlow School Committee, Case No. 25-77 52:19 – Mahmoud v. Taylor (2025) 606 U.S. 522 (Listen to Episode 97 Mahmoud v. Taylor) (Client News Brief 28 - July 2025) 53:31 – Access to facilities 55:15 – Grimm v. Gloucester County School Board (4th Cir. 2020) 972 F.3d 586 56:06 – Million Dollar Question: Does Title IX protect individuals based on gender identity or not?   For more information on the topics discussed in this podcast, please visit our website at: www.lozanosmith.com/podcast

In this episode, host Sloan Simmons joins Partners Chelsea Olson-Murphy and Kyle A. Raney for a practical discussion of the holding, impact, and resulting best practices following the Supreme Court’s opinion in Mahmoud v. Taylor regarding the ability of parents to opt their children out of certain curriculum based upon sincerely held religious beliefs. Show Notes & References 1:50 – Opt-out statutes in other states and how California can prepare for these changes 3:08 – Case background: Mahmoud v. Taylor (2025) 606 U.S. 522 (Client News Brief - July 2025) 9:31 – Wisconsin vs. Yoder (1972) 406 U.S. 205 9:59 – Kennedy v. Bremerton School Dist. (2022) 597 U.S. 507  (Client News Brief - August 2023) 11:11 – What the Supreme Court held in Mahmoud 15:56 – Why the Mahmoud decision matters for Local Educational Agencies (LEAs) 20:20 – Employment Div., Dept. of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith (1988) 485 U.S. 660 21:56 – Practical considerations 27:42 – Interactions with California law 27:51 – The FAIR Act (Client News Brief - October 2025) 28:38 – Best practices and recommendations for LEAs 36:16 – Template opt-out forms and three prongs of information to gather 41:16 – Takeaways and final thoughts   For more information on the topics discussed in this podcast, please visit our website at: www.lozanosmith.com/podcast

In this episode, host Sloan Simmons joins Public Finance Chair Daniel Maruccia and Municipal and Governance Co-Chair Mary Lerner to discuss opinions of counsel and their important role relating to bond issuances and related transactions.  Dan and Mary discuss the legal parameters applicable to opinions of counsel as well as practical impacts and challenges that can arise in this area of the law. Show Notes & References 1:26 – What are Opinions of Counsel 2:26 – Who asks for an Opinion of Counsel and why 10:08 – Information needed prior to signing an Opinion 12:09 – The seriousness of signing Opinions 15:01 – Unqualified v. Qualified Opinions 16:19 – Due diligence analysis 23:48 – Consequences to being wrong 25:39 – Timelines and missing deadlines 32:05 – Best practices   For more information on the topics discussed in this podcast, please visit our website at: www.lozanosmith.com/podcast

When it comes to hiring certificated staff, the process is now more complex and challenging. In this episode, host Aly Bivins connects with Lozano Smith attorneys Dulcinea Grantham and Gail Zurek to unpack the key provisions and implications of Assembly Bill (AB) 2534, focusing on legal obligations for Local Education Agencies related to certificated employees and egregious misconduct. Packed with FAQs, explanations of key obligations, and steps for practical compliance, this episode is essential listening for HR teams, administrators, and anyone involved in the certificated hiring process. Show Notes & References 1:24 – Assembly Bill (AB) 2534 and impact on certificated employees (Education Code section 44939.5) (Client News Brief 47 - November 2024) 3:02 – Who is affected by AB 2534 (employees and Local Education Agencies (LEAs)) 4:59 – The definition of "egregious misconduct" 6:52 – New obligations under AB 2534 7:47 – Obligations for LEAs responding to requests 12:49 – Issues regarding non-responsive LEAs 13:30 – Timelines for responses from LEAs 15:32 – Substitute teachers 16:25 – Steps for a hiring LEA that receives a report of egregious misconduct 18:36 – Disclosing reports to applicants or former employees 20:17 – Caution regarding what information LEAs provide to CTC (California Commission on Teacher Credentialing) 24:44 – What to do about information inadvertently not reported to CTC 23:34 – Common questions LEAs are facing 27:45 – Quick tips for LEAs   For more information on the topics discussed in this podcast, please visit our website at: www.lozanosmith.com/podcast.