Judge Thomas S. Garza

Judge Thomas S. Garza has served on the San Bernardino County Superior Court since his appointment by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger on October 3, 2007. He received his legal education at Western State University College of Law. With over 16 years on the bench, Judge Garza's documented judicial record includes at least one high-profile constitutional intervention: in September 2023, he issued a temporary restraining order blocking a Southern California school district's policy requiring teachers and staff to notify parents when a student requested a change in gender identity or pronouns. That ruling drew national media coverage from outlets including the New York Times, CNN, NBC News, and Fox Business. The September 2023 TRO demonstrates Judge Garza's willingness to grant injunctive relief in cases involving student privacy rights and LGBTQ+ issues in educational settings. The ruling reflects a judicial posture that, in at least this instance, weighed student privacy interests against parental notification rights and intervened to preserve the status quo pending further proceedings. This is the only documented substantive ruling available for analysis. Because the available data is limited to biographical information and a single notable case, attorneys should treat the insights below as grounded in a narrow evidentiary base. The TRO ruling provides a concrete data point regarding Judge Garza's approach to injunctive relief and civil rights matters, but broader generalizations about his courtroom style, procedural preferences, or ruling patterns across other subject matter areas are not supported by the available data.

The single documented ruling from Judge Garza involves a grant of a temporary restraining order in a civil rights/student privacy matter. Attorneys seeking injunctive relief before Judge Garza in cases involving constitutional rights or civil liberties should be prepared to demonstrate that the traditional TRO factors — particularly irreparable harm and likelihood of success on the merits — are met with specificity. Judge Garza's willingness to issue a TRO in a nationally contested and politically sensitive case signals that he does not shy away from granting emergency relief when he finds the legal basis sufficient. For attorneys opposing injunctive relief in cases with civil rights dimensions, the documented record suggests that Judge Garza will engage seriously with constitutional arguments on the merits rather than deferring to institutional or governmental defendants on the basis of deference alone. Counsel opposing a TRO or preliminary injunction should be prepared with strong, case-specific legal arguments rather than relying on the political sensitivity of the subject matter as a reason for judicial restraint. Beyond the single documented ruling, no attorney observations or additional ruling analyses are available. Attorneys appearing before Judge Garza in routine civil, criminal, or family law matters should not extrapolate from the 2023 TRO ruling to those contexts. Standard best practices — thorough preparation, clear briefing, and professional courtroom conduct — remain essential, and counsel should seek current local-practice intelligence from attorneys with recent direct experience in Judge Garza's courtroom.

• critical

  Research the 2023 TRO Ruling in Full

  Obtain and review the full text of Judge Garza's September 2023 temporary restraining order in the school district gender identity notification case. The reasoning, legal standards applied, and framing of the order are the only direct window into his analytical approach available from the record.

• critical

  Prepare Thorough TRO/Preliminary Injunction Briefing

  If seeking or opposing injunctive relief before Judge Garza, address each element of the standard with case-specific evidence and authority. The documented record shows he will engage with and rule on these motions in contested, high-stakes matters.

• important

  Gather Current Local Practice Intelligence

  With only one documented ruling available, consult attorneys who have recently appeared before Judge Garza in San Bernardino Justice Center for current intelligence on his procedural preferences, courtroom demeanor, and expectations.

• important

  Review San Bernardino Superior Court Local Rules

  In the absence of judge-specific procedural data, thorough compliance with San Bernardino County Superior Court local rules and standing orders is essential to avoid procedural missteps.

• ›No attorney observation data is available regarding Judge Garza's specific courtroom preferences or decorum expectations. Adhere strictly to San Bernardino Superior Court general courtroom rules.
• ›Given that Judge Garza has presided since 2007, treat him as an experienced jurist who expects counsel to be fully prepared on both the facts and the law before appearing.
• ›In civil rights or injunctive relief matters, be prepared to address constitutional arguments directly and substantively — the documented record shows Judge Garza engages with the merits in high-stakes cases.