Law & Courts

Title IX Rule to Protect LGBTQ+ Students Temporarily Blocked in 4 States

A federal judge in Louisiana called the added protections in the Biden administration rule revision “undoubtedly contrary to Title IX”
By Libby Stanford — June 14, 2024 4 min read
Demonstrators advocating for transgender rights and healthcare stand outside of the Ohio Statehouse on Jan. 24, 2024, in Columbus, Ohio. Republican states are filing a barrage of legal challenges against the Biden administration's newly expanded campus sexual assault rules, saying they overstep the president's authority and undermine the Title IX anti-discrimination law.
  • Save to favorites
  • Print

The Biden administration’s new Title IX rule, which explicitly prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity in schools, won’t go into effect in four states in August after a federal judge temporarily blocked it.

The June 13 preliminary injunction applies to Idaho, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Montana and is the first legal blow to the U.S. Department of Education’s April rewrite of Title IX regulations. The Education Department has said schools must comply with the revised rule by Aug. 1, but at least seven lawsuits involving 26 states aim to prevent it from taking effect. The legal challenges take issue with the department’s attempt to include gender identity in the regulation’s definition of “sex-based discrimination.”

The order adds to the growing confusion surrounding Title IX, forcing schools in states whose leadership opposes the revision to choose whether to follow state directives or federal regulation when accommodating transgender and nonbinary students and staff. And it creates a legal landscape in which the new regulation will, at least temporarily, apply in some parts of the country and not others.

In the order, Louisiana Judge Terry Doughty, an appointee of former President Donald Trump, said the Education Department’s interpretation of Title IX would “subvert the original purpose of Title IX: protecting biological females from discrimination.”

See Also

In this Nov. 21, 1979 file photo, Bella Abzug, left, and Patsy Mink of Women USA sit next to Gloria Steinem as she speaks in Washington where they warned presidential candidates that promises for women's rights will not be enough to get their support in the next election.
In this Nov. 21, 1979, photo, Bella Abzug, left, and Patsy Mink of Women USA sit next to Gloria Steinem as she speaks in Washington at an event where they warned presidential candidates that promises for women's rights will not be enough to win their support in the next election.
Harvey Georges/AP
Federal Explainer What Is Title IX? Schools, Sports, and Sex Discrimination
Libby Stanford, May 31, 2024
2 min read

“Title IX was written and intended to protect biological women from discrimination,” Doughty wrote. “Such purpose makes it difficult to sincerely argue that, at the time of enactment, ‘discrimination on the basis of sex’ included gender identity, sex stereotypes, sexual orientation, or sex characteristics.”

In a statement on Friday, an Education Department spokesperson said the agency was reviewing the ruling and defended the basis for the Title IX revision.

“Title IX guarantees that no person experiences sex discrimination in a federally-funded educational environment,” the statement said. “The Department crafted the final Title IX regulations following a rigorous process to realize the Title IX statutory guarantee. The Department stands by the final Title IX regulations released in April 2024, and we will continue to fight for every student.”

The order came two days after another federal judge in Texas struck down three-year-old Education Department guidance, which said the agency would use Title IX to protect students from discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. That ruling had no official impact on the revised Title IX rule, but the judge who wrote it arrived at many of the same conclusions Doughty did in his order.

The scope of Title IX is a long-running and divisive debate

The Education Department has relied on the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2020 ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County, Ga., in which the court found that federal employment law prohibits employers from discriminating against employees on the basis of sexuality or gender identity, to bolster its revision to Title IX.

But Doughty argues that the Bostock ruling cannot apply to Title IX because “the purpose of Title VII [the federal anti-discrimination employment law] to prohibit discrimination in hiring is different than Title IX’s purpose to protect biological women from discrimination in education.”

Under the revised rule, the Education Department said that schools must investigate harassment that is considered “severe” or “pervasive,” which is a change from the Trump-era rule requiring schools to only investigate harassment claims that are considered both “severe” and “pervasive.” The change broadens the scope of incidents that are considered harassment.

In the order, Doughty said the change to the harassment standard “allows for one political ideology to dominate the educational landscape while either silencing the other or calling the other ‘harassment’ under these standards.”

See Also

Illustration of checklist.
F. Sheehan for Education Week + iStock / Getty Images Plus

What the federal order on Title IX means for schools

Doughty’s order only applies to schools in states that participated in the lawsuit—Idaho, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Montana—and is temporary, meaning it’s not an official ruling on the Title IX rule revision.

The preliminary injunction order blocks the rule from taking effect while the lawsuit fully plays out. In the order, Doughty said he believes the states suing the Education Department would be able to win in their legal challenge because they have demonstrated that the Title IX rule contradicts federal law.

Twenty-six Republican-led states have filed lawsuits against the Education Department in opposition to the rule. There will likely be more orders temporarily blocking the rule from taking effect in states involved in lawsuits as conservative judges evaluate the cases.

However, Democratic state leaders have weighed in in support of the Biden administration’s rule. Sixteen Democratic attorneys general filed a multistate amicus brief Thursday supporting the rule in a challenge led by Alabama. Schools in those states, including California, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, are less likely to see an injunction halting the rule’s implementation for them, as their states aren’t challenging the new rule in court.

While schools should not violate the court order by implementing the Title IX rule when there is an injunction, they should be prepared for the temporary order to be overturned, Title IX compliance lawyers have told Education Week. That means they should consult with local lawyers, set up the district infrastructure to comply with the revised rule, and keep up to date with court developments.

Events

This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
School & District Management Webinar
Leadership in Education: Building Collaborative Teams and Driving Innovation
Learn strategies to build strong teams, foster innovation, & drive student success.
Content provided by Follett Learning
School & District Management K-12 Essentials Forum Principals, Lead Stronger in the New School Year
Join this free virtual event for a deep dive on the skills and motivation you need to put your best foot forward in the new year.
This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
Privacy & Security Webinar
Navigating Modern Data Protection & Privacy in Education
Explore the modern landscape of data loss prevention in education and learn actionable strategies to protect sensitive data.
Content provided by  Symantec & Carahsoft

EdWeek Top School Jobs

Teacher Jobs
Search over ten thousand teaching jobs nationwide — elementary, middle, high school and more.
View Jobs
Principal Jobs
Find hundreds of jobs for principals, assistant principals, and other school leadership roles.
View Jobs
Administrator Jobs
Over a thousand district-level jobs: superintendents, directors, more.
View Jobs
Support Staff Jobs
Search thousands of jobs, from paraprofessionals to counselors and more.
View Jobs

Read Next

Law & Courts Student Says Snapchat Enabled Teacher's Abuse. Supreme Court Won't Hear His Case
The high court, over a dissent by two justices, decline to review the scope of Section 230 liability protection for social media platforms.
4 min read
The United States Supreme Court is seen in Washington, D.C., on July 1, 2024.
The U.S. Supreme Court is seen in Washington, D.C., on July 1, 2024. The high court declined on July 2 to take up a case about whether Snapchat could be held partially liable for a teacher's sexual abuse of a student.
Aashish Kiphayet/NurPhoto via AP
Law & Courts What the Supreme Court's Chevron Decision Could Mean for Biden's Title IX Rule
The decision overrules a 40-year-old precedent and could impact lawsuits challenging the final Title IX rule.
5 min read
Visitors pose for photographs at the U.S. Supreme Court on June 18, 2024, in Washington.
Visitors pose for photographs at the U.S. Supreme Court on June 18, 2024, in Washington. The high court on June 28 overruled a longtime precedent and held that courts, not federal agencies, have the primary authority to interpret ambiguous federal statutes.
Jose Luis Magana/AP
Law & Courts Religious Charter School Is Unconstitutional, Oklahoma Supreme Court Rules
The state high court says the planned Catholic virtual charter school violates a state provision against aid to 'sectarian' institutions.
4 min read
The Oklahoma Supreme Court is pictured in the state Capitol building in Oklahoma City, May 19, 2014. The Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled Tuesday, June 25, 2024, that the approval of the nation's first state-funded Catholic charter school, St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual Charter School, is unconstitutional.
The Oklahoma Supreme Court is pictured in the state Capitol building in Oklahoma City, May 19, 2014. The high court ruled Tuesday, June 25, 2024, that the approval of the nation's first state-funded Catholic charter school, St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual Charter School, is unconstitutional.
Sue Ogrocki/AP
Law & Courts Supreme Court Case on Transgender Youth Medical Care May Impact Schools
The justices will decide whether a Tennessee law that bars certain treatments for transgender minors violates the equal-protection clause.
5 min read
FILE - The Supreme Court is seen under stormy skies in Washington, June 20, 2019. In the coming days, the Supreme Court will confront a perfect storm mostly of its own making, a trio of decisions stemming directly from the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, File)
The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to take up a case about a state law that bars certain medical care for transgender minors, with the legal issues holding potential implications for schools.
J. Scott Applewhite/AP