The legal war over James Younger, the boy at the center of a national firestorm regarding childhood gender transition, has reached a definitive and quiet turning point. Honestly, if you haven’t followed the case since it first exploded in a Dallas courtroom years ago, the current reality might surprise you. It's no longer just a Texas story. It’s a California story now.
James and his twin brother, Jude, are no longer living in Texas. Following a series of high-stakes court battles and a move that Jeff Younger fought all the way to the state’s highest court, the twins are now residents of California with their mother, Dr. Anne Georgulas.
The Shift to California
For a long time, the central question was whether James would be raised as a boy or as a girl named Luna. Jeff Younger argued that James identifies as a boy when they are together; Georgulas maintained that the child is transgender. In late 2022, the Texas Supreme Court essentially cleared the way for the mother to relocate the children to California. This was a massive blow to Jeff’s legal strategy. He had warned that moving to a "sanctuary state" for gender-affirming care would effectively strip him of any ability to prevent a medical transition.
Essentially, the Texas courts decided they couldn't intervene based on "speculation" about what might happen in another state.
Where Things Stand in 2026
As of early 2026, the situation has shifted into a new phase of legal finality. In November 2024, a California judge—Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Mark Juhas—denied Jeff Younger’s bid for custody. More significantly, the court granted Georgulas the authority to seek gender-affirming healthcare for James, who is now roughly 13 years old. This decision bypassed the previous Texas requirement that both parents must consent to such treatments.
🔗 Read more: When is the Next Hurricane Coming 2024: What Most People Get Wrong
Basically, the "joint consent" shield that Jeff relied on for years has been dismantled by the California legal system.
The family's current life is marked by a deep, physical, and emotional divide. Jeff Younger has been vocal about his refusal to participate in "supervised visitation." He argues that being forced to see his children under supervision—while being expected to affirm a gender identity he disagrees with—is a form of "brainwashing" he won't take part in. Consequently, he has noted publicly that he primarily communicates through letters and gifts rather than in-person visits. It's a heavy reality. Two twins, one father, and thousands of miles of legal and ideological distance between them.
The "Save James Act" and Political Echoes
Even though James is no longer in Texas, his name is still a fixture in the state’s political landscape. In February 2025, Texas State Representative David Lowe introduced the "Save James Act."
The goal? To criminalize the social transition of children—things like using different pronouns or dressing a child in clothing of the opposite sex—and making it a state jail felony. It's a polarizing piece of legislation. For supporters, it’s a necessary protection against what they call "grooming." For critics, it’s an overreach that targets vulnerable kids and ignores the advice of major medical associations.
💡 You might also like: What Really Happened With Trump Revoking Mayorkas Secret Service Protection
Jeff Younger has endorsed the act, but he’s also been candid about the fact that it came too late for his own family. He ran for the Texas House himself back in 2022 on this very platform but didn't win his seat. Now, he watches from the sidelines as Texas law moves in the direction he wanted, while his own son lives under a completely different legal framework in California.
What the Experts Say (and Where They Clash)
This case isn't just a "he-said, she-said" domestic dispute. It's a collision of two different medical and legal philosophies.
- The Affirming Approach: Dr. Anne Georgulas and various therapists involved in the case have pointed to James’ consistent preference for a female identity since he was very young. They follow the "gender-affirming care" model, which suggests that supporting a child's self-identified gender leads to better mental health outcomes.
- The Watchful Waiting/Skeptical Approach: Jeff Younger and his expert witnesses, like psychiatrist Miriam Grossman, argue that James doesn't meet the clinical criteria for gender dysphoria. They suggest that the "transition" was a result of maternal influence and that the child's identity was fluid depending on which parent he was with.
The courts in California have clearly sided with the former.
A Fragmented Future
The reality for jeff younger son now is one of total immersion in his mother’s preferred environment. In California, the law (specifically SB 107) is designed to protect families seeking gender-affirming care from out-of-state interference. This means the Texas "Save James Act" or any future Texas rulings have zero jurisdiction over what happens to James in Los Angeles or San Francisco.
📖 Related: Franklin D Roosevelt Civil Rights Record: Why It Is Way More Complicated Than You Think
You've got a child entering his teenage years under the spotlight of a case that has shaped state laws across the country. It’s a lot for any kid to carry. While the media focus often stays on the father’s social media updates or the mother’s court filings, the boys themselves are growing up in a high-conflict vacuum.
Actionable Insights and Reality Checks:
- Understand Jurisdiction: If you are following this for legal precedents, remember that the "home state" of the child usually dictates which laws apply. Once the Texas Supreme Court allowed the move, Texas lost its grip on the case.
- Monitor Legislative Changes: If you're interested in the "Save James Act," keep an eye on the 89th Texas Legislative Session. While it won't change James Younger’s life, it will set the standard for how Texas handles social transition moving forward.
- Recognize the Human Cost: Beyond the "culture war" headlines, this is a story of a family that has completely fractured. Regardless of where you stand on the medical debate, the outcome is a father who hasn't seen his children in years and children who are at the center of a permanent legal battle.
The "James Younger case" is essentially "finished" in the eyes of the courts, even if the public debate is just getting started. The transition from Texas joint custody to California sole authority marks the final chapter of this specific legal saga.