ReportWire

Tag: Title IX

  • Federal Government Opens Title IX Investigation Into Vancouver Public Schools – KXL

    [ad_1]

    VANCOUVER, WA – The U.S. Department of Education has launched a federal civil rights investigation into Vancouver Public Schools, examining whether the district’s policies on transgender student athletes violate Title IX, a federal law barring sex-based discrimination in educational programs that receive federal funding.

    The inquiry, led by the Department’s Office for Civil Rights, is part of a broader wave of probes involving 18 school districts, colleges, and state education agencies nationwide that permit students to compete in school sports based on gender identity rather than biological sex.

    Federal officials say policies that allow transgender girls to compete in girls’ athletic competitions could discriminate on the basis of sex by disadvantaging female athletes, potentially violating Title IX protections. The complaint against Vancouver and other districts alleges such policies “jeopardize both the safety and equal opportunities of women and girls” in school programs and athletics.

    In Washington state, Vancouver is joined in the investigation by Cheney, Sultan and Tacoma public schools, among others.

    In a brief statement to media outlets, Vancouver Public Schools spokesperson Jessica Roberts confirmed the district received notification of the federal investigation and is reviewing the allegations. However, district officials have not provided further public comment while the review is ongoing.

    The rollout of these investigations comes amid heightened national debate and legal scrutiny of transgender participation in school sports. This week, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in cases challenging state laws that ban transgender girls and women from competing in girl’s sports teams — a decision that could shape the legal landscape for school athletics nationwide.

    Observers note that the federal government’s approach reflects a broader push to interpret Title IX strictly, particularly under the current administration’s policies, which critics say seek to redefine how gender identity factors into civil rights protections. If institutions are found in violation, they risk losing federal funds.

    The investigation has drawn attention from educators, parents and advocacy groups on both sides of the debate over transgender rights and competitive fairness. Supporters of inclusive policies argue that allowing students to participate consistent with their gender identity is essential for their well-being and protected under civil rights law, while opponents argue it undermines protections intended for female athletes.

    As the process unfolds, Vancouver Public Schools and other districts under scrutiny will likely face intense public interest and legal pressure. Federal officials have not released a timeline for concluding the investigations or commented on their current status.

    More about:

    [ad_2]

    Tim Lantz

    Source link

  • Advocates demand that trans youth be protected as cases are argued in Supreme Court

    [ad_1]

    This Tuesday, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments regarding two cases about transgender girls in sports: Little v. Hecox and West Virginia v. B.P.J. 

    In 2020, Idaho Governor Brad Little signed into law HB 500, which bans transgender girls and women from participating in school sports. This affected the first case’s respondent: transgender student athlete Lindsay Hecox, who was barred from participating in the track and cross country teams as well as intramural soccer and running clubs.

    In 2021, then-governor of West Virginia, Jim Justice, approved HB 3293, which enacts a similar ban. Becky Pepper-Jackson (B.P.J.), now an incoming high school student, opposed the discriminatory policy when it prevented her from joining her then-middle school’s cross country and track and field teams. Pepper-Jackson has also only undergone female puberty due to gender-affirming care, but West Virginia argues that its anti-transgender policies should be upheld because of her assigned sex at birth. 

    For LGBTQ+ advocates and allies, these cases illustrate the burden and harm transgender people face daily as their rights to privacy, dignity, care, and inclusion are constantly at risk of being eroded and stripped completely. 

    Experts also wonder if these cases could potentially reshape the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause as well as the civil rights law, Title IX. The former prohibits discrimination on other factors aside from race, though governments have argued that certain “suspect classifications” can be looked at more closely through “heightened scrutiny.” The latter prohibits sex-based discrimination in federally-funded schools.

    What is unfolding and how local advocates are informing change:

    The fight ahead is weary, and experts are certain that the states involved will not concede their points. In a webinar organized yesterday by the Williams Institute, several LGBTQ+ policy experts, including Rutgers Law School professor and anti-discrimination scholar Katie Eyer, examined where these cases may be heading, as well as efforts to muddy the arguments. 

    “It seems possible that the court might try to sidestep that issue here by saying that these laws don’t target transgender people at all,” Eyer said. “I think for most people, this seems bananas: like an upside-down world. We all know these laws were about transgender people.”

    Jenny Pizer, an attorney for the LGBTQ+ civil rights legal organization Lambda Legal and a co-counsel member for the B.P.J. case, affirmed this sentiment at a press conference organized Tuesday by Lambda Legal and AIDS Healthcare Foundation affinity group, FLUX. “They’ve gone to great lengths to say there’s no discrimination,” Pizer said. “[They’re arguing] it’s just technicalities or classifications.” 

    Eyer was one of three Equal Protections scholars who filed an amicus brief to be considered in the Supreme Court cases. An amicus brief is a legal document submitted by someone who is not involved directly in a case but who may offer additional perspectives and information that can inform the ruling process. 

    Eyer’s brief provided historical context that clarified the disadvantages of blanket sex-based policies. These types of laws, according to Eyer, uphold stereotypes over nuance, truth, and equal protection guidelines. For Pepper-Jackson, who has only undergone female puberty and who does not “benefit” from what dissidents define as a sex-based competitive “advantage,” the state should have provided her the ability to argue that she should have the same rights as other girls. 

    “Of course, the state hasn’t done that here,” Eyer said. “Under these precedents, the Supreme Court should invalidate the laws as applied to those trans girls who really don’t have a sex-based competitive advantage.”

    Who are these bills protecting?

    The states argue that their policies are merely “ensuring safety and fairness in girls’ sports.” But queer advocates understand that this is a veneer for the exclusion of transgender people from society. Forcing trans youth out of sports “does not protect anyone,” according to California LGBTQ Health and Human Services Network director Dannie Ceseňa, who spoke at Tuesday’s press conference.

    “It encourages the scrutiny of children’s bodies. It fuels gender policing, and it creates hostile school environments — not safer ones,” said Ceseňa. “Our youth should not inherit a world that treats their existence as a threat.” 

    Transgender people are systemically disempowered 

    At yesterday’s webinar, Distinguished Visiting Scholar at the Williams Institute Andrew Flores discussed his own amicus brief in support of Pepper-Jackson. The brief highlights the need for “heightened judicial scrutiny” in Pepper-Jackson’s case because the majority of political processes “systemically fail” transgender people. 

    For example, the transgender community faces substantial barriers in exercising their voter rights because of voter identification laws and other policies that regulate and define identity. “Even being able to gain access to the franchise is a burden for transgender people,” Flores said. “The court does play an important role there. It can grant legitimacy to arguments…or at least [acknowledge] that these issues are more complicated than maybe how they’ll receive them.” 

    What’s next?

    Experts are hesitant about where the cases stand. “Bottom line: I don’t know what the court is going to do in these cases. They may send them back down for further development,” Pizer said, who thinks future rulings will not shift more overarching policies regarding transgender rights. “I think they will probably decide based only on laws about sports, not laws more broadly about the rights of trans folks.” 

    But whatever is decided, the impacts will trickle down to everyone. While the cases deal specifically with anti-transgender policies, experts warn that LGBTQ+ issues have always been tied to racial, economic, and disability justice. “There’s this looming constitutional campaign to really undermine civil rights,” said Eyer. “That affects LGBTQ people. It affects people of color. It affects people with disabilities. It affects everybody, and it really is concerning.” 

    As transgender inclusion and safety are being argued on the largest legal stage, advocates are asking: “When are you going to step up?” They are also sending a direct message to transgender youth: “We see you, we believe in you, and we are fighting for you,” said Ceseňa. “You deserve joy, community, and care. You deserve a future that reflects who you are and not who anyone or any politician demands you to be. Trans youth deserve better.” 

    Kristie Song is a California Local News Fellow placed with the Los Angeles Blade. The California Local News Fellowship is a state-funded initiative to support and strengthen local news reporting. Learn more about it at fellowships.journalism.berkeley.edu/cafellows.

    [ad_2]

    Kristie Song

    Source link

  • Keeler: Deion Sanders isn’t enough. CU Buffs football needs a sugar daddy for Christmas.

    [ad_1]

    Omarion Miller finished Julian Lewis’ passes the way Meg Ryan finished Billy Crystal’s sentences in “When Harry Met Sally.”

    Alas, there won’t be a happy ending. Or a sequel.

    Miller — the CU Buffs’ leading receiver in 2025 — announced Wednesday that he was entering the transfer portal. And apparently Tawfiq Byard will have whatever Miller’s having. The Buffs safety, CU’s best defensive player this past fall despite playing much of it with just one working hand, also plans to transfer out of BoCo next month.

    Pain is a process. The gut says, “If we can go 3-9 with you, we can go 3-9 without you, dude.”

    The head says something else. Something along the lines of, “Man, Deion Sanders could really, really use a sugar daddy this Christmas.”

    Remember when the Buffs hired Coach Prime and finally got out ahead of the college football curve?

    That lasted about 16 to 18 months.

    Celebrity coaches are out.

    Celebrity investors are in.

    Texas Tech, per YahooSports.com, raised about $49 million for student-athletes from July 2024 to July 2025. A new Red Raiders donor group, called the Athletic Donor Circle, had already pledged roughly $35 million as of early November.

    Last week, Utah became the first Power 4 athletic department to formally partner with a private equity firm. ESPN.com reports that Otro Capital out of New York is ready to pump $400 million into the Utes.

    Texas Tech bought the best team on the planet, went 12-1, won the Big 12 title and earned a bye in the College Football Playoff. Utah posted a 10-2 record and beat the Buffs 53-7 in late October.

    CU athletics, meanwhile, is reportedly staring at a potential $27 million deficit for the 2025-2026 fiscal year, according to multiple outlets. Thank players and Prime, primarily.

    Sanders’ salary went up by nearly $5 million for 2025 after his new extension kicked in. The House vs. NCAA settlement required CU to share revenues with student-athletes starting this past July 1, with a cap of $20.5 million for this fiscal cycle. Yet it’s hard to imagine good players such as Miller and Byard taking pay cuts at their next ports of call, isn’t it?

    Buffs officials saw the train coming years ago, even as the bills keep piling up. Which is why the indoor practice facility is now sponsored by Mountain States Ford Stores. And why artificial turf was installed at Folsom Field — so the stadium could be utilized more often as a host to revenue-driving events outside the athletic calendar.

    Concerts and uniform sponsorships — UNLV will reportedly collect about $2.2 million annually over the next five years from Acesso Biologics, its new “Official Jersey Patch Partner” — will only cover so much. The student-athlete revenue sharing pool is expected to increase by 4% next year. Sanders is slated to make $11 million in 2027, $11 million in 2028 and $12 million in 2029.

    The Buffs can’t play at the same poker tables as the Red Raiders and Utes — or retain star players — without a serious influx of cash. Utah is pointing the way now. Not CU.

    College football is so broken. The system? The system — and by that, we mean greedy college presidents and the corporate suits they propped up as conference commissioners — for too long took advantage of student-athletes as a pool of indentured labor, as entertainment contractors on the cheap. A free market for talent was overdue. But the pendulum has swung so hard the other way that roster retention is the stuff of satire now.

    Bowls? Bowls are nothing more than three-hour infomercials for some random chamber of commerce or provincial company you’ve never heard of; exhibitions propped up by Disney stiffs to eat up programming blocks over the holidays. When Iowa State and Kansas State would sooner eat a million bucks in league fines than join in, that ship’s sailed. (Not you, Pop-Tarts Bowl. You’re weirdly perfect. And perfectly weird.)

    Fans? Fans are caught in the crossfire, casualties in the battle of dollars over sense. Ticket prices and point-of-entry fees will skyrocket. Pay-per-view will become more the norm than the exception. Universities will pass the cost to the consumer.

    The Buffs vow that they won’t cut sports — and with only 13 non-football options offered, they don’t have much room on that front to cut, anyway. They’ve vowed that they won’t lop student-athlete services, although outgoing athletic director Rick George laid off two track coaches last spring.

    Something’s gotta give. Of course, if Coach Prime wanted to help retain student-athletes, he could donate half of his $10 million salary to the revenue-sharing pool. That’s not happening.

    In an effort to slow the chaos, FBS scholarships could require a minimum of two years of service at your initial college of choice coming out of high school. But that’s not happening, either.

    As of early Friday morning, at least 11 CU players had expressed interest in transferring out. Among the Big 12 programs that didn’t change coaches (Kansas State, Iowa State, Oklahoma State), only West Virginia had seen more defections (19) as of mid-December than the Buffs.

    [ad_2]

    Sean Keeler

    Source link

  • Elk River School Board discusses Minnesota’s transgender athlete policy, Title IX

    [ad_1]

    Minnesota’s policy on transgender athletes in high school sports is leaving parents and school boards in limbo.

    On Sept. 30, the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services determined in a joint finding that the Minnesota Department of Education and the Minnesota State High School League both violated Title IX. 

    Federal officials told Minnesota to reverse the state’s transgender athlete policy or lose federal funding. 

    The debate over discrimination and Title IX protections played out in Elk River on Monday night. 

    The school district was preparing to request for clarification from the MSHSL and MDE through a resolution, but school board Chairman John Anderson told WCCO that, after it went through legal, the language got softened up and it lost support.

    The resolution that was pulled urged the MSHSL, the MDE and lawmakers to review transgender student athletic policies for “fairness and safety in girls sports.”

    Board member Mike Nordos said the intent of the resolution was to urge the state high school league to side with the federal government to keep federal money, up to $4 million.

    Board member John Anderson said last year, the Rogers Girls softball team, which is in this district, played Champlin Park, which had a player he describes as a “biological male” on the team, giving what he called an unfair advantage.

    A few school board members tonight disagreed.

    “Let this play itself out,” Board Member Sara Weis said. “This is a debate between federal law and state law. It needs to be worked out within the courts.”

    “I don’t think it is fair for girls sports,” Board Member Mindy Freiberg said. “How can you can look your daughter in the eye and say, ‘I know you’ve worked really hard and you’ve trained,’ and whatever, but it’s just not fair, or that is fair. It’s your opinion versus mine and I do stand with girls and coaches.”

    A few people spoke at the podium during a public comment period during the meeting. One woman said the district is playing politics with students’ lives.

    “If this board were to pursue this policy barring transgender students from playing sports, I have to ask, who is going to enforce it? Who will inspect children’s bodies and determine whether they’re allowed to play? Who will be responsible for outing students, humiliating them?” The woman said.

    The Forest Lake School Board sent a letter to MDE and the MSHSL asking them to follow federal law immediately. 

    [ad_2]

    Jason Rantala

    Source link

  • Loudoun Co. students’ suspension on hold while legal action over locker room incident proceeds – WTOP News

    [ad_1]

    A Loudoun County student’s suspension is on hold while litigation over whether the punishment was warranted moves forward, a federal judge ruled Friday.

    A Loudoun County student’s suspension is on hold while litigation over whether the punishment was warranted moves forward, a federal judge ruled Friday.

    The ruling comes after two students’ families filed a lawsuit against the Northern Virginia school district, alleging the kids were wrongfully punished for speaking out about an incident in a school locker room. During the encounter, they said a transgender student identifying as male recorded them in a locker room at Stone Bridge High School.

    The students had been suspended for 10 days for harassment. And in a new court filing this week, the school system described incidents in which the two students harassed the other student before the incident in the locker room.

    The Washington Post was first to report on the filing.

    “These boys never directly spoke with the complainant, and so our boys were merely complaining that there was a biological girl in their locker room,” said Victoria Cobb, president of the Founding Freedoms Law Center. “The school has decided to make them political pawns in a battle over ideology.”

    In court documents, the school system said witnesses describe threatening incidents or behavior in gym class and school hallways.

    In an 11-second video, a speaker is heard saying “girl boy” several times. The student who filed the complaint said the two boys said to “get out” of the locker room and was referred to as “it” during P.E. class.

    According to the court files, investigators spoke to Loudoun County Public School staff members and a variety of student witnesses.

    The locker room incident prompted some community members to speak out, and resulted in a federal Department of Education investigation. The agency found Loudoun County violated Title IX and retaliated against the boys, who expressed concern about being recorded by a transgender boy in the boys’ locker room.

    The incident has also been referenced as the Education Department found bathroom policies at five Northern Virginia school districts violate Title IX. The agency said policies that allow students to use facilities based on their gender identity rather than biological sex violate the law. The families’ lawsuit seeks to end that school system policy in Loudoun County.

    A recording of the locker room incident, documents said, reveals a series of comments the two boys made, including things such as “there’s a girl,” “why is there a girl?”

    Reviewers described in documents as “independent decision makers” ruled that the two boys had sexually harassed the student.

    “Our clients never spoke to the female student,” Cobb, the boys’ attorney, said. “They only expressed confusion and discomfort about having a girl in the boys locker room.”

    After Friday’s ruling, Cobb said one of the two students can remain in school while the case progresses. The other moved away from the area, but Cobb said it’s “about their student record more than a suspension.”

    In a statement on Friday, a spokesman for Loudoun County schools said the division acknowledges “the court’s decision today and will prepare for the next steps in this matter. We remain committed to fostering a safe, inclusive, and respectful learning environment for all students.”

    Get breaking news and daily headlines delivered to your email inbox by signing up here.

    © 2025 WTOP. All Rights Reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.

    [ad_2]

    Scott Gelman

    Source link

  • Minnesota’s transgender athlete policy violates Title IX, federal investigation claims

    [ad_1]

    Federal officials say that the Minnesota Department of Education and the Minnesota State High School League both violated Title IX with their policy on transgender athletes, in a Tuesday announcement.

    The U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services determined in a joint finding that Minnesota “allowed male athletes to compete” on several girls’ sports teams.

    MDE told WCCO it is “reviewing the letter and remains committed to ensuring every child has the opportunity to thrive in a safe and supportive school community.”

    WCCO also reached out to MSHSL for comment and is waiting for a response.

    The departments issued a proposed resolution agreement to MSHSL and the MDE, ordering them to voluntarily resolve the Title IX violation within 10 days or “risk imminent enforcement action.”

    The agreement requires the two agencies to revise any guidance “permitting males to compete in girls’ sports” to comply with Title IX and submit updated Title IX training, procedure and process materials.

    Under the agreement, MDE must also issue a statewide notice “to all federally funded entities operating interscholastic athletic programs mandating their strict compliance with Title IX by separating athletics and intimate facilities based on sex,” and the notice must require “entities to adopt biology-based definitions of ‘male’ and ‘female’” and have a reminder that non-compliance could place federal funds in jeopardy, according to a press release from HHS.

    Additionally, MDE is ordered to “restore to female athletes all records and titles misappropriated by male athletes competing in female categories,” and to send each athlete an apology letter “for allowing her educational experience to be marred by sex discrimination.” The department must also demand in writing that MSHSL take parallel action.

    Hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding for public schools in Minnesota, which lawmakers defined as a trans refuge state in 2023, are at stake.

    The investigation began in February when MSHSL announced it would not be following an executive order signed by President Trump banning transgender girls and women from competing on sports teams that match their gender identity. Schools that don’t comply with the order risk losing federal funding and could face legal action.

    The U.S. Department of Education elevated the investigation in June and HHS initiated a compliance review around the same time. Officials specifically cited the state champion Champlin Park High School softball team, which was also the subject of another lawsuit because of a transgender pitcher.

    In April, Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison announced a lawsuit against the Trump administration, claiming the president’s two executive orders targeting transgender youth and adults violate both the U.S. Constitution and Title IX. The lawsuit requests the court declare the orders unconstitutional and unlawful, Ellison said. U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit in June for lack of jurisdiction and failure to state a claim. A judge heard arguments on the motion earlier this month and has yet to make a decision.

    Jonah Kaplan

    contributed to this report.

    Riley Moser

    Riley Moser is a digital producer who covers breaking news and feature stories for CBS Minnesota. Riley started her career at CBS Minnesota in June 2022 and earned an honorable mention for sports writing from the Iowa College Media Association the same year.

    [ad_2]

    Riley Moser

    Source link

  • Education Dept. withholds funds from Fairfax County schools amid pressure over bathroom policy – WTOP News

    [ad_1]

    The Department of Education has started to withhold federal funding from Fairfax County Public Schools, a significant escalation in the battle over the Northern Virginia school district’s bathroom policies.

    The Education Department withheld federal funding from Fairfax County Public Schools, as pressure continues to build for the school district and several Northern Virginia school systems to amend their gender policy over the use of restrooms and locker rooms or risk losing federal funding.

    The school division had submitted a reimbursement request for a small amount, and that request has been denied, a person familiar with the situation but not authorized to speak publicly told WTOP. It’s unclear how much has been withheld and which programs will be affected.

    The action is the latest in the back-and-forth between the school division and the federal agency over the county’s policy for intimate facilities, such as bathrooms.

    Fairfax County and four other Virginia school systems said their bathroom policies are in compliance with federal law. However, the Education Department said policies that allow students to use the bathroom based on gender identity, rather than biological sex, violate Title IX.

    Education Department spokesperson Julie Hartman told The Associated Press, “The Department will not rubber-stamp civil rights compliance for New York, Chicago, and Fairfax while they blatantly discriminate against students based on race and sex.”

    Fairfax County schools will lose $3.4 million in Magnet School Assistance Program funding next fiscal year, which starts Oct. 1.

    An Education Department spokesperson said no funds have been withheld from the MSAP, but “the Office for Civil Rights cannot certify that Fairfax County Schools are in compliance with civil rights laws, so it cannot continue receiving the MSAP grant moving forward. The grant will expire on 9/30 and they will not be getting another MSAP grant.”

    Fairfax County filed a lawsuit to prevent funding from being frozen, but a federal judge declined to rule, citing a lack of jurisdiction. Since then, the division has filed an appeal and an emergency motion for injunction pending appeal.

    Fairfax County schools Superintendent Michelle Reid previously told WTOP the division could lose up to $167 million in federal funding, which supports students with disabilities and those who receive free school meals. School leaders in Arlington, Prince William County and the City of Alexandria have expressed similar concerns.

    Get breaking news and daily headlines delivered to your email inbox by signing up here.

    © 2025 WTOP. All Rights Reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.

    [ad_2]

    Scott Gelman

    Source link

  • Education Department eyes prestigious Fairfax County school over bathroom gender policy – WTOP News

    [ad_1]

    A prestigious Fairfax County high school stands to lose millions of dollars in funding as the Education Department follows through on a threat to withhold funding to the Virginia school system over its gender policy regarding the use of restrooms and locker rooms.

    A prestigious Fairfax County high school stands to lose millions of dollars in funding as the Education Department says it will follow through on a threat to withhold funding to the Virginia school system over its gender policy regarding the use of restrooms and locker rooms.

    The department confirmed to WTOP it’s denying the certification of magnet school grant applications to Fairfax County Public Schools. The denial would result in a cut of about $3.4 million to Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology.

    The Department of Education has given Fairfax County schools until 5 p.m. Friday to comply.

    This comes on the heels of Education Secretary Linda McMahon’s social media post saying the department “will not certify that magnet schools in New York City, Chicago & Fairfax Public Schools are following the law when they are clearly not.”

    This latest move comes after the Department of Education claimed earlier this year that Fairfax County, Loudoun County, Prince William County, Arlington and Alexandria City public schools are violating Title IX with their policies that let students use bathrooms based on their gender identity rather than their biological sex.

    The school systems have maintained that they are in compliance with state and federal laws, and that the Education Department is misinterpreting Title IX. Fairfax County said it stands to lose $167 million in federal funding over the dispute.

    “The notification from the Department of Education regarding the withholding of grant funding is the latest in a series of efforts to defund and diminish the tradition of excellence of public education in Fairfax County Public Schools and in other school divisions around the country,” the school system said in a statement to WTOP.

    FCPS also revealed in its response that it and many other school districts have lost federal funding for what it calls “a critical five year youth school board based mental health program” called SBMH.

    “FCPS maintains that the DOE’s decision to label the division as ‘high-risk’ and threaten funding is not supported by any identifiable factors or evidence.”

    Get breaking news and daily headlines delivered to your email inbox by signing up here.

    © 2025 WTOP. All Rights Reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.

    [ad_2]

    Kyle Cooper

    Source link

  • Loudoun Co. schools violated Title IX, retaliated by suspending male students, DOE says – WTOP News

    [ad_1]

    Loudoun County Public Schools violated Title IX and retaliated against two male students being filmed in a boys’ locker room by a transgender student.

    WTOP’s Nick Iannelli discussed the DOE finding with Loudoun Now reporter Patrick Lewis

    The U.S. Department of Education said Loudoun County Public Schools violated Title IX and retaliated against two male students who reported being filmed in a boys’ locker room by a transgender student who identified as a male.

    The ruling, in the form of a press release, came the day after the families of the two students filed a federal lawsuit against LCPS, seeking to overturn suspensions for the two students at Stone Bridge High School in Ashburn, Virginia.

    The decision is the latest by the Department of Education, under President Donald Trump, focused on the issue of whether transgender children should be allowed to use bathrooms and locker rooms that correspond with their gender identity.

    “Loudoun County’s adherence to radical gender ideology has repeatedly placed its students in harm’s way,” said Acting Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Craig Trainor. “Loudoun County failed to treat allegations of sexual harassment equally: it promptly investigated a female student’s complaint but quickly dismissed and failed to meaningly investigate two of its male students’ complaints of sexual harassment.”

    According to the DOE release, LCPS has 10 days to voluntarily enter the Department’s Resolution Agreement, which requires the school system to take the following actions:

    • Rescind the suspensions imposed on the two male students;
    • Review its findings to determine if discipline of the male students is warranted and, if Loudoun County determines that it is, the discipline must not exceed the discipline imposed on students who engaged in similar conduct and who had comparable disciplinary histories;
    • Issue letters apologizing for Loudoun County’s failure to properly investigate Title IX complaints;
    • Notify the students and their parents that Loudoun County Public Schools will promptly investigate the formal Title IX complaints in a manner that is compliant with the requirements of Title IX; and
    • Provide training to all high school and Loudoun County staff who receive or respond to reports of sexual harassment under Title IX.

    Contacted by WTOP for a response to the DOE findings, Loudoun County Public Schools referred to an earlier comment: “At no time would LCPS suspend a student simply because they expressed some kind of discomfort. A reading of our Title IX resources should make it clear that there is a high bar to launch a Title IX investigation and an even higher bar to determine a student is in violation of Title IX.”

    What this means, what comes next

    Shortly after the DOE statement, WTOP evening anchor Nick Iannelli spoke with Loudoun Now reporter Patrick Lewis. Iannelli said the facts about what happened in the boys’ bathroom aren’t clear to the public.

    “We know the school’s Title IX office found the two boys guilty of sexual harassment and sex based discrimination, and we only know that boys’ lawyers and their families released that,” said Lewis. “The schools are not going to release anything at all because they’re saying its protected student records.”

    While the school system’s statement provides no specifics, Iannelli posited that the statement suggests other factors led to the students’ suspensions.

    “There’s a lot of bars that you legally have to hit to even initiate a Title IX investigation once ou receive a complaint,” said Lewis. “Obviously, they found them guilty of harassment and discrimination, so from LCPS’s side, they’re saying they checked a lot of boxes, which obviously the boys and their attorneys are saying they were nowhere near checking.”

    In July, DOE’s Office of Civil Rights found five Northern Virginia school divisions — Loudoun, Fairfax, Prince William, Arlington, and the City of Alexandria — had violated Title IX. The school systems refused to abide by the proposed DOE resolution agreement.

    While the new release from the Department of Education doesn’t specify what steps would be taken if Loudoun doesn’t comply, “Presumably the Education Department will move further in their process to withdraw federal funding from the schools,” said Lewis.

    However, Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares referred his investigation into the locker room filming incident to the U.S. Department of Justice. “No word from them on whether they’re even investigating that, but potentially, down the road, there could also be criminal elements to all of this, as well,” said Lewis.

    Get breaking news and daily headlines delivered to your email inbox by signing up here.

    © 2025 WTOP. All Rights Reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.

    [ad_2]

    Neal Augenstein

    Source link

  • Fairfax Co. superintendent describes possible consequences if federal funding gets frozen – WTOP News

    [ad_1]

    Days after a federal judge dismissed a lawsuit that Fairfax and Arlington Public Schools hoped would prevent federal money from being frozen, both Northern Virginia school districts have filed an appeal.

    Days after a federal judge dismissed a lawsuit that Fairfax and Arlington Public Schools hoped would prevent federal money from being frozen, both Northern Virginia school districts have filed an appeal.

    And Fairfax County Schools’ Superintendent Michelle Reid is warning about what’s at stake if the divisions don’t receive the funds.

    “It harms our most vulnerable children,” Reid told WTOP on Wednesday. “And in this case, tens of thousands of our most vulnerable children.”

    On Friday, Judge Rossie D. Alston Jr. of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia declined to rule in the case, writing that the court lacks jurisdiction. The appeal has been filed with the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit of Virginia.

    WTOP has contacted the Department of Education for comment on the appeal.

    The step is the latest in the back and forth between several Virginia school divisions and the Department of Education. The federal agency designated five districts — Fairfax, Loudoun, Prince William, Arlington and the City of Alexandria — as “high risk” and threatened to withhold federal dollars, because they didn’t change their policies for intimate facilities, including bathrooms and locker rooms.

    The agency found the policies to be in violation of Title IX, because they allow students to use spaces such as bathrooms based on their gender identity instead of their biological sex. The school districts maintain they’re following the law.

    In Fairfax, Virginia’s largest school system, Reid said there’s $167 million in federal money that could be in jeopardy. It helps pay for Title I programs, IDEA programs to support students with special services and food and nutrition programs, “which for over 70,000 of our children may be the only meal of the day they actually receive.”

    In the coming weeks, Reid said the district will start submitting for reimbursement for Title I and food and nutrition programs, as it typically does.

    “That’s when we’re going to experience the potential for greater scrutiny and freezing of our funds, which has been what the Department of Education has indicated will happen,” she said.

    The school district has contacted the Education Department by phone and left messages, and sent a letter too, but Reid said they haven’t received a response.

    In Arlington, meanwhile, Superintendent Francisco Duran has said the high risk designation meant “effectively freezing $23 million” that is used to offer free meals and help support students with disabilities.

    In a statement, a spokesman for Arlington schools said Wednesday that while Judge Alston dismissed the case on jurisdictional grounds, “his decision explicitly upheld the legality of our transgender student policy and its adherence to Title IX.”

    The appeal decision, the statement said, is to protect money for essential services, such as free meals and academic support, “for the students who rely on them most.”

    Reid said in Fairfax, she’s been communicating what’s at risk but is expecting the funding to be reinstated and not frozen.

    “The five jurisdictions here in Northern Virginia, as well as the divisions across the Commonwealth and across the country, remain committed to the power and promise of public education,” Reid said. “These attempts to defund public education simply won’t be tolerated.”

    Get breaking news and daily headlines delivered to your email inbox by signing up here.

    © 2025 WTOP. All Rights Reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.

    [ad_2]

    Scott Gelman

    Source link

  • Fairfax County Public Schools appeals dismissal of suit against Education Dept. tied to gender policy – WTOP News

    [ad_1]

    The fight over gender and bathrooms at Fairfax County Public Schools is continuing, as the school system appealed the dismissal of a lawsuit against the Department of Education.

    The fight over gender and bathrooms at Fairfax County Public Schools is continuing, as the school system appealed the dismissal of a lawsuit against the Department of Education to regain federal funding.

    The Fairfax County School Board on Tuesday filed the appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for Virginia’s Fourth Circuit after a judge denied the school district’s request to obtain a preliminary injunction on Friday that would prevent the Department of Education from freezing its federal funding.

    The Education Department placed Fairfax County Public Schools and four other Northern Virginian districts on “high risk” status, meaning the Education Department would scrutinize their federal reimbursement requests.

    This all comes after the Department of Education claimed Fairfax, along with Loudoun, Prince William, Arlington and Alexandria City public schools are violating Title IX with their policies that let students use bathrooms based on their gender identity rather than their biological sex.

    Judge Rossie Alston Jr. of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia ruled Friday that the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction.

    Fairfax and Arlington counties filed the initial lawsuit last month.

    In a statement, FCPS Superintendent Michelle Reid said they believe their current policies on Title IX regarding bathroom and locker room usage comply with state and federal law. They are continuing to reach out to the DOE about the “high risk” status designation.

    “These vital federal funds that remain at risk support food and nutrition services, as well as staffing cafeterias. Other funding supports services and instruction for students with disabilities, aims to improve student achievement, enhances technical education, promotes teacher development, and funds community education programs,” Reid wrote.

    Get breaking news and daily headlines delivered to your email inbox by signing up here.

    © 2025 WTOP. All Rights Reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.

    [ad_2]

    Luke Lukert

    Source link

  • Denver Public Schools defies Trump administration deadline for removing all-gender bathrooms

    [ad_1]

    Denver Public Schools has not complied with the Trump administration’s request that the district convert all multi-stall, all-gender bathrooms in its schools into separate facilities for female and male students by the agency’s Monday deadline.

    In a five-page response dated Sunday, DPS general counsel Kristin Bailey accused the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights of “intransigence,” a failure to adequately communicate and a “startling” lack of clarity surrounding the alleged Title IX violation levied against the school district.

    “We write to rebut the stated presumption that the District and the Office for Civil Rights (“OCR”) are at an impasse,” Bailey wrote. “We are not. In fact, as the District has shared throughout this Directed Investigation, we want to discuss resolution options with OCR, and at this stage, the District remains interested in doing so.”

    Education Department representatives did not immediately respond to a request for comment from The Denver Post on Monday.

    On Aug. 28, the Education Department announced that it had found DPS discriminated against girls by creating a gender-neutral bathroom at East High School and by adopting a districtwide policy allowing students to use facilities corresponding with their gender identities.

    DPS Superintendent Alex Marrero issued a statement the following day, vowing to protect Denver students and families from an administration hostile to the LGBTQ community.

    The department’s Office of Civil Rights said DPS’s all-gender restrooms violated Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, enacted to allow girls and women to participate in educational activities in school, including sports, without sexual harassment.

    The office gave the district 10 days to agree to a proposed resolution — which included converting all-gender restrooms back to single-sex facilities — or “risk imminent enforcement action.”

    The findings come after the Education Department announced in January that it was investigating DPS over the East High’s conversion of a girls restroom into a bathroom for all genders last academic year.

    The Denver high school created the gender-neutral bathroom at the request of students who wanted another facility, choosing to convert a girls bathroom because it was more cost-effective, district officials said.

    The all-gender bathroom has stalls that offer more privacy than other facilities, with 12-foot walls that nearly reach the ceiling and metal blocks that prevent people from seeing through.

    In response to the January investigation, East High recently renovated a boys bathroom into a second all-gender restroom — a move the district said it made to address any disparity. The district has two other all-gender facilities, at the Denver School of the Arts and the Career Education Center Early College.

    In the federal agency’s letter alleging DPS violated Title IX, the Education Department also said the Denver district created “a hostile environment for its students by endangering their safety, privacy and dignity” through its use of all-gender restrooms.

    The Trump administration has repeatedly threatened to cut K-12 and higher education funding from schools with policies that the federal government calls discriminatory, particularly those that relate to gender identity, the LGBTQ community and race.

    [ad_2]

    Elizabeth Hernandez

    Source link

  • Judge won’t rule on Fairfax, Arlington schools lawsuit to prevent federal funding freeze – WTOP News

    [ad_1]

    A federal judge on Friday decided not to rule in the case of two Northern Virginia school systems suing to prevent the Department of Education from freezing federal funding because the districts haven’t changed their policies for intimate spaces.

    A federal judge on Friday decided not to rule in the case of two Northern Virginia school systems suing to prevent the Department of Education from freezing federal funding because the districts haven’t changed their policies for intimate spaces.

    In a 13-page filing, Judge Rossie D. Alston Jr. of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia said that because Fairfax and Arlington Public Schools’ complaints are about requests “to order the payment of money,” the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction.

    The filing stated that jurisdiction lies with the U.S. Court of Federal Claims.

    The decision comes days after the divisions first filed the lawsuit, hoping to stop the department from freezing federal funds. The two districts, as well as Loudoun, Prince William and the City of Alexandria school systems, have been scrutinized by the agency because of their bathroom policies.

    The Education Department has said policies that let students use bathrooms based on gender identity violate Title IX, and that schools should adopt policies that allow kids to use bathrooms based on biological sex.

    “We are considering our next steps in the courts as we strongly believe the Department of Education’s classification of FCPS as a ‘high-risk’ entity effectively holds the division hostage and violates binding precedent from the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals,” Fairfax County Public Schools said in a statement. “This designation unfairly harms tens of thousands of our most vulnerable students who depend on these federal dollars.”

    WTOP has contacted Arlington Public Schools and the Department of Education for comment.

    Last month, the Education Department announced it had placed five Northern Virginia districts on “high risk” status and would scrutinize their federal reimbursement requests, because they didn’t change their policies. While Fairfax and Prince William counties have said they don’t get federal funding through Title IX, they do receive federal dollars as a small fraction of their budgets.

    “These critical federal dollars are used to support food and nutrition services, as well as the staffing of cafeterias,” the Fairfax County schools’ statement said. “Other funding is used for services and instruction for students with disabilities and students from low-income families, to increase student achievement, support technical education, promote teacher development, and fund community education programs.”

    Arlington, meanwhile, previously said the Education Department’s move resulted in freezing $23 million in funding. In a post on the division’s website announcing the lawsuit, Superintendent Francisco Durán said that money pays for free breakfast and lunch for thousands of low-income students and support for special education students.

    The Education Department gave the five Northern Virginia school systems a deadline to comply with the request to change their policies. All of them told the agency they believe their current practices are in compliance with the law.

    Get breaking news and daily headlines delivered to your email inbox by signing up here.

    © 2025 WTOP. All Rights Reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.

    [ad_2]

    Scott Gelman

    Source link

  • Arlington, Fairfax school systems sue Education Department over funding freeze tied to gender policies – WTOP News

    [ad_1]

    The lawsuits come after the Education Department requested Arlington Public Schools, Fairfax County Public Schools, and three other Northern Virginia school districts to change their policies that allow transgender students to use bathrooms and locker rooms that align with their gender identity, rather than their biological sex.

    Arlington and Fairfax counties’ public school districts are suing the Department of Education in an effort to protect their federal funding from being frozen in retaliation for the school systems’ gender policies surrounding the use of bathrooms and locker rooms.

    The lawsuits come after the Education Department requested Arlington Public Schools, Fairfax County Public Schools, and three other Northern Virginia school districts to change their policies that allow transgender students to use bathrooms and locker rooms that align with their gender identity, rather than their biological sex.

    The school systems refused, and the Education Department responded by placing them on “high-risk” status, meaning the department will scrutinize their federal reimbursement requests.

    In their complaints, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Arlington and Fairfax county schools are seeking to have that status reversed. The school districts say tens of millions of dollars for critical services for students are on the line.

    “These federal funds are not abstract numbers on a spreadsheet; they represent vital support for our most vulnerable children. This funding supports our food and nutrition services, services for our students with disabilities, students from low-income families, and programs that promote teacher development and student achievement across the division,” Fairfax County Public Schools Superintendent Michelle Reid said in a letter addressed to staff and families.

    “The DOE’s ‘high-risk’ designation unfairly harms tens of thousands of our students by threatening these essential services,” Reid continued.

    FCPS said in a statement up to $167 million in federal funding has been essentially frozen.

    In his letter to the Arlington Public Schools community, Superintendent Francisco Durán said the Education Department’s “high-risk” designation effectively halts $23 million in funding that the school district relies on.

    That funding, Durán said, is mainly used to provide more than 8,000 low-income students with free meals and thousands of special needs students with counseling and other educational support.

    In its complaint filed Friday, Arlington Public Schools asserts the Education Department’s funding freeze violates Title IX, the Administrative Procedures Act and the Spending Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The school system also said the department is incorrectly interpreting Title IX.

    Fairfax County schools state, in its complaint also filed Friday, that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit’s ruling in Grimm v. Gloucester County School board binds the school system. In that decision, FCPS wrote, the Fourth Circuit ruled that the Equal Protection Clause and Title IX compel local school boards to provide students with access to facilities that correspond with their gender identity.

    This week, Reid said in her letter that her school system reached out to the Education Department, “to address the impossible position that the DOE has placed on our school division — whether to violate a federal court ruling regarding the support of our transgender students or risk this critical funding. The DOE did not respond.”

    Durán said he expects a judge to hear the case quickly and issue an order that will preserve federal funding.

    WTOP has reached out to the Department of Education for comment.

    The Washington Post first reported the lawsuit.

    WTOP’s Scott Gelman contributed to this report.

    Get breaking news and daily headlines delivered to your email inbox by signing up here.

    © 2025 WTOP. All Rights Reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.

    [ad_2]

    Thomas Robertson

    Source link

  • ‘Confused and a bit perplexed’: Fairfax Co. superintendent reacts to ‘high-risk status’ from Education Department – WTOP News

    [ad_1]

    In an interview with WTOP, Superintendent Michelle Reid said the division is “a bit confused and a bit perplexed as to how best to address this, because there really is not a relevant exemplar in recent years that anyone can recall that called out anything of this nature.”

    Days after the Department of Education placed five Northern Virginia school systems that didn’t change their bathroom policies on high-risk status, Fairfax County’s superintendent said the state’s largest school district is reviewing the agency’s message and considering next steps.

    In an interview with WTOP, Superintendent Michelle Reid said the division is “a bit confused and a bit perplexed as to how best to address this, because there really is not a relevant exemplar in recent years that anyone can recall that called out anything of this nature.”

    In a four-page letter sent to Prince William County Superintendent LaTanya McDade on Monday, and obtained by WTOP, Secretary of Education Linda McMahon said the division has to submit a corrective action plan within 30 days. It also told the district to submit plans for compliance with all federal laws.

    The step marks a significant escalation in the back-and-forth between the federal agency and the five Northern Virginia districts.

    Arlington, Alexandria, Loudoun, Prince William and Fairfax counties’ schools all rejected a request to change their bathroom policies, which currently allow students to use intimate facilities based on their gender identity. While the school districts said their practices align with current law, the education department said they violate Title IX.

    “We were really disappointed that the Department of Education wouldn’t engage in any kind of thoughtful collaboration, and rather, sent this letter in response,” Reid said. “We were very disappointed with this.”

    In the letter to Prince William County schools, obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request, McMahon said despite an extension to the deadline to change bathroom policies, the district “stated it does not intend to make the necessary policy changes to come into compliance with Title IX.” The division is on high-risk status so the agency can “ensure taxpayer dollars are not being spent on illegal activity.”

    There hasn’t been funding withheld to date, and school districts routinely apply for reimbursement when the funding is tied to federal grants.

    In Fairfax, Reid said it’s unclear what the high-risk status means, “because we recently received a very clean federal audit on our Title II grant. And in fact, as we read the regulation around this high-risk language, we’re in compliance with all elements of operation in terms of these federal grants.”

    Despite the uncertainty, Reid said the district is confident that “appropriated Congressional funds will continue to be appropriated.” The school districts have 10 business days to ask for a reconsideration of the high-risk designation.

    In the case of Fairfax County, Reid said practices “are aligned with Virginia law and the rulings of the federal Court of Appeals in the Fourth Circuit.”

    The district is planning to reach out the federal agency for clarification, she said.

    Get breaking news and daily headlines delivered to your email inbox by signing up here.

    © 2025 WTOP. All Rights Reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.

    [ad_2]

    Scott Gelman

    Source link

  • 5 Northern Virginia school districts placed on high-risk status after not changing bathroom policies – WTOP News

    [ad_1]

    Five Northern Virginia school divisions have been placed on high-risk status and will have federal reimbursement requests scrutinized, the Department of Education announced.

    Five Northern Virginia school divisions that refused to change their gender policies over the use of bathrooms and locker rooms have been placed on “high-risk status” by the U.S. Department of Education and will have their federal reimbursement requests scrutinized.

    In a news release, the federal agency said the school districts will be placed on “reimbursement status” for funding, including formula funding, discretionary grants and impact aid grants. Schools in Loudoun, Fairfax, Prince William and Arlington counties and the City of Alexandria will have to pay up front and then request reimbursement, the department said.

    The announcement comes days after the districts all announced they wouldn’t make changes to their policies for intimate facilities, such as restrooms and locker rooms. The Education Department requested they do so, saying policies that allow students to use bathrooms based on gender identity rather than biological sex violated Title IX.

    The divisions, however, said their current practices are in compliance with the law.

    “The Northern Virginia School Divisions that are choosing to abide by woke gender ideology in place of federal law must now prove they are using every single federal dollar for a legal purpose,” Education Secretary Linda McMahon said in the release.

    Prince William County School Board Chairman Babur Lateef said the federal agency already approves its reimbursement requests based on spending for special education and Title IX. However, he said, $50 million could be at risk for Virginia’s second-largest school system.

    “Now, they’re saying they will scrutinize all our reimbursements at a level to determine if we are compliant with federal laws, and we’re assuming that, since they don’t believe we’re compliant, they are likely to withhold money to our school divisions for our Title I monies and students for disabilities,” Lateef told WTOP. “We don’t believe they are allowed to do that, but it looks like that’s what they are going to try to do.”

    Prince William, Lateef said, is “willing to do whatever it takes to protect our federal funds and we’re looking at different options.”

    Meanwhile, Fairfax County Public Schools said it received the DOE’s letter just after 4 p.m. Tuesday. On Friday, the original deadline for divisions to change their policies, Fairfax responded with information about why its existing practices are consistent with state and federal law, the division said in a statement.

    In that message, Fairfax “also requested the Department of Education stop further action while this issue is clarified by the courts.”

    The school district said it’s reviewing the new letter in detail, and while the issue is pending, policies will stay aligned with state law and a ruling from the federal Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.

    “Any student who has a need or desire for increased privacy, regardless of the underlying reason, shall continue to be provided with reasonable accommodations,” Fairfax County schools said.

    A spokesman for Loudoun County Public Schools, meanwhile, said the division doesn’t believe it’s in violation of Title IX: “LCPS disputes that we have engaged in activity that would warrant being characterized as a ‘high-risk’ grantee and will consider appropriate next steps.”

    The City of Alexandria school system told WTOP that it’s reviewing the correspondence from the Education Department.

    WTOP has contacted Arlington County Public Schools for comment.

    Get breaking news and daily headlines delivered to your email inbox by signing up here.

    © 2025 WTOP. All Rights Reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.

    [ad_2]

    Scott Gelman

    Source link

  • 3 takeaways from the Moms for Liberty summit

    3 takeaways from the Moms for Liberty summit

    [ad_1]

    This is an edition of our Future of Learning newsletter. Sign up today to get it delivered straight to your inbox.

    What you need to know

    Hechinger’s executive editor, Nirvi Shah, joins us this week to share what she learned at the recent Moms for Liberty summit and how the organization’s targeted focus on transgender students helped lead to a temporary block to portions of President Joe Biden’s new Title IX regulations in some states. 

    You found that schools even in the same district are following different Title IX regs. What does this mean for students? 

    The big takeaway: These are confusing times. Federal court rulings have paused *requiring* schools in some states to follow new Biden administration regulations on sex discrimination. And individual schools in other states are also exempt from being *forced* to adopt those rules, though local school boards, generally, can adopt the regulation. The reality on the ground is, however, that schools within some districts may be following different federal rules about Title IX, which makes for an administrative mess. 

    Hechinger’s Sarah Butrymowicz created a pair of searchable databases to see which colleges and K-12 schools do not have to follow the Biden administration, but the list can change — 1,700 schools were added during the week of the Moms for Liberty summit — so make note of the time stamp.

    After some defeats for Moms for Liberty-backed school board candidates, observers have questioned whether the group’s influence has waned. What’s your assessment of the group’s strategy? 

    The group is still big on endorsing school board candidates, and school board races are the only elected office for which it makes endorsements, co-founder Tiffany Justice told me and Hechinger writer Laura Pappano in an interview during the summit. (Justice endorsed Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump personally during a one-on-one chat the two had at the M4L summit over Labor Day weekend in D.C.) Justice reiterated in our interview that “All politics is local,” and that the group wants power to be closest to the people and not the federal Education Department. “So how do you solve that? You make sure that you have strong local school boards who answer to their constituents.”

    School board races aside, many, including Moms for Liberty, would characterize it as a significant victory — for local schools and like-minded parents — that they got a federal court to agree to preferences of Moms for Liberty member parents on which Title IX regulation should apply at their children’s schools, even if Justice said it was something she never imagined when the group got its start during the pandemic. 

    What most surprised you about this year’s Moms for Liberty summit? 

    This was the theme of our story: this laser-like focus on transgender issues at schools. It came up often and was at the center of many speeches and breakout sessions. In the past, the group has had a more expansive message but this year, they seem to have one specific target. “There’s no such thing as a transgender child. Please quote me on that,” Justice told us. “There are children who are experiencing mental distress and they need kindness and compassion and help to feel comfortable in their own bodies, because no child is born in the wrong body. There is no right way to be a boy or a girl.”

    What we are reading

    All-charter no more: New Orleans opens its first traditional school in nearly two decades 

    My colleague, Ariel Gilreath, reports on the opening of the first traditional school run by the New Orleans school district since Hurricane Katrina devastated the city. 

    Theater, economics and psychology: Climate class is now in session

    Hechinger Report editor Caroline Preston launched her climate change newsletter (which you can sign up for here) with a look at how some colleges are embedding climate-related instruction into diverse fields.

    Students aren’t benefiting much from tutoring, one new study shows

    Despite billions in federal funding during the pandemic, a new study shows that tutoring to help students catch up on learning losses hasn’t yielded great results, reports Hechinger columnist Jill Barshay.

    How transparent are state school report cards about the effects of COVID?

    Most states are failing to help parents understand how the pandemic negatively affected students’ academic performance and attendance, according to a new report from the Center on Reinventing Public Education. This may be because some school districts didn’t have quality longitudinal data on absenteeism and other measures before the pandemic and have not made that data public. 

    Characteristics associated with English Learners’ academic performance

    Having a teacher of the same race, and attending a school with a higher percentage of students enrolled in dual language immersion English instruction, is associated with better reading scores for English learners, according to a new analysis by the Government Accountability Office. Hechinger Report contributor Kavitha Cardoza wrote recently about a former superintendent’s fraught efforts to make his Alabama district more welcoming for English learners. 

    A framework for digital equity

    In this report, nonprofit group Digital Promise explains how K-12 schools can take a leadership role in ensuring Black, Hispanic, Native American and rural students have equal access to high speed internet, computers and digital literacy training. I wrote about these digital divides in an article about the 2024 National Education Technology Plan.

    How Americans feel about hot-button education issues

    About 60 percent of people support school vouchers, according to a new poll from news outlet The 19th and SurveyMonkey. Eight-seven percent of respondents want schools to teach about the history of slavery and racism, 60 percent favor instruction on Judeo-Christian values, and 51 percent support instruction on LGBTQ+ people in history and literature. 

    From the vault

    When my colleague Sarah Butrymowicz began reporting on education in 2010, cell phones in the classroom were all the rage. Educators and experts hoped that allowing students access to their own devices in school would revolutionize learning. Now that’s changed, of course: A growing number of districts and states are banning the devices or clamping down on cell phone use (and in some cases even Chromebooks and tablets), arguing that they distract students from learning and pose threats to young people’s mental health. 

    Cell phone use also frequently leads to behavior problems. Sarah spent months last winter examining thousands of discipline records from a dozen school districts as part of Hechinger’s series on school discipline, Suspended for … what? Cell phones played a role in hundreds of student suspensions. Students were suspended for refusing to give up their phones, recording teachers, blaring music or taking videos, and taking calls in the middle of class. As cell phone bans spread, we’ll be following whether some of these discipline issues subside – or whether there’s an uptick in discipline and suspensions as schools punish kids and send them home for refusing to follow the bans. 

    Et cetera

    Do we need to rethink school policies that put parents on the hook for paying for lost or damaged digital devices? Michael Wear, chief executive officer of the Center for Christianity & Public Life, recently used X to draw attention to this issue: “As someone who grew up in a family that struggled financially, I really think school districts need to think carefully about the ethics and ramifications of mandating kids accept a $1000 electronic device that they didn’t ask for, and then telling parents that if anything happens to the device the family will have to compensate the district for the loss.”

    This story about Moms for Liberty was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Sign up for the Hechinger newsletter.

    The Hechinger Report provides in-depth, fact-based, unbiased reporting on education that is free to all readers. But that doesn’t mean it’s free to produce. Our work keeps educators and the public informed about pressing issues at schools and on campuses throughout the country. We tell the whole story, even when the details are inconvenient. Help us keep doing that.

    Join us today.

    [ad_2]

    Javeria Salman

    Source link

  • Where are Biden’s Title IX discrimination rules on hold? – The Hechinger Report

    Where are Biden’s Title IX discrimination rules on hold? – The Hechinger Report

    [ad_1]

    Lawsuits challenging the Biden administration’s Title IX rule on sex discrimination have led to judges blocking its implementation in 26 states. The new rule was also halted in schools and universities attended by children of members of Moms for Liberty, Young America’s Foundation and Female Athletes United, following lawsuits from those groups.

    The result is a messy legal landscape with school officials trying to figure out their obligations. Below are lists of K-12 schools and colleges that, because of court injunctions, are continuing to follow the Trump administration’s Title IX rules instead of the newer regulations.

    Search below and read our full report about this issue.

    table visualization

    The Hechinger Report provides in-depth, fact-based, unbiased reporting on education that is free to all readers. But that doesn’t mean it’s free to produce. Our work keeps educators and the public informed about pressing issues at schools and on campuses throughout the country. We tell the whole story, even when the details are inconvenient. Help us keep doing that.

    Join us today.

    [ad_2]

    Sarah Butrymowicz

    Source link

  • Supreme Court maintains block on entirety of Biden administration’s new Title IX rule

    Supreme Court maintains block on entirety of Biden administration’s new Title IX rule

    [ad_1]

    Washington — The Supreme Court on Friday declined to let the Biden administration enforce portions of a new rule that includes protections from discrimination for transgender students under Title IX while legal proceedings continue.

    The high court left intact two separate orders from federal courts in Kentucky and Louisiana, which blocked the Department of Education from enforcing the entirety of the rule across 10 states. The Justice Department had asked the Supreme Court to put part of the decisions on hold, but it declined the requests.

    Four of the nine justices would have let part of the rules take effect, according to the order, but all members of the court agreed that the key disputed changes, including the new definition of “sex discrimination” to include “gender identity” and the restrictions on same-sex spaces, could remain blocked.  

    The measure at issue in the disputes was announced by the Biden administration in April and expanded Title IX’s protections to LGBTQ students. The landmark 50-year-old law prohibits education entities that receive federal funds from discriminating on the basis of sex. The rule took effect Aug. 1, but only in less than half of the states. Federal judges have temporarily blocked it in 26 states as a result of legal challenges.

    The court fights before the Supreme Court involved two groups of states that challenged three provisions of the rule: The first recognizes that Title IX’s prohibition on sex discrimination covers gender identity; the second broadens the definition of “hostile-environment harassment” to include harassment based on gender identity; and the third clarifies that a school violates Title IX when it prohibits transgender students from using restrooms and other facilities consistent with their gender identity.

    One case was brought by four states, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, and Idaho, as well as the Louisiana Department of Education. The second was filed by six states, Tennessee, Kentucky, Ohio, Indiana, Virginia, and West Virginia. 

    In June, federal district courts in Louisiana and Kentucky found the states were likely to succeed in their cases and blocked enforcement of the entire rule across the 10 states involved in the litigation. The Biden administration asked federal appeals courts in both cases to allow it to temporarily enforce part of the rule — the provisions that were not challenged — but each declined the requests in divided decisions.

    In seeking emergency relief from the Supreme Court, the Justice Department argued that the district court’s injunctions are “grossly overbroad” because they block “dozens” of the rule’s provisions that weren’t challenged by the states, and that the lower court therefore did not find were likely unlawful.

    “The district court’s injunction would block the department from implementing dozens of provisions of an important rule effectuating Title IX, a vital civil rights law protecting millions of students against sex discrimination,” Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar wrote in both requests.

    She said the April 2024 rule is an “omnibus” measure, and most of it does not address gender identity. Instead, its provisions include clarifications to definitions of more than a dozen terms, including “complaint,” “elementary school” and “postsecondary institution.”

    While acknowledging the challenges to federal regulations before they’re enforced are common, she accused lower courts of taking a “blunderbuss approach” to preliminary relief in these cases.

    “The harm is particularly acute here because Title IX is one of the core federal civil rights statutes that guarantees nondiscrimination in the nation’s education system,” Prelogar wrote. “If the court does not grant the requested stay, the department will be unable to vindicate the critical protections of that statute in a wide swath of the country.”

    But in the challenge from Louisiana involving the four states, Republican officials told the Supreme Court in a filing that the Biden administration’s rule would “radically impact” schools, teachers and families. 

    They claimed the Education Department took Title IX and its “promise of equal educational opportunities for both sexes and transformed it into a 423-page mandate” that requires covered entities to allow male students in girls’ bathrooms, locker rooms and other facilities, and teachers and students to use a transgender individual’s preferred pronouns. 

    “The Department cannot seriously contest that a partial stay would sow widespread confusion. Teachers would only have days, at most, before school starts, to understand their obligations under the judicially blue-penciled rule,” the Republican attorneys general wrote. “And that uncertainty and harm would equally affect parents and students.”

    They said there is uncertainty about how a practically blocked rule would operate, leaving parents unable to make decisions about whether to send their children to public school.

    In a separate filing in the Kentucky case, officials from the six states accused the Biden administration of forcing schools to spend “immense sums” to comply with the new rule in just three months.

    They warned the court not to “unleash eleventh-hour havoc — and needless diversion of valuable resources — on schools, students, and sovereign states.”

    In addition to the Louisiana and Kentucky cases, a number of other challenges to the Biden administration’s Title IX rule are pending in the lower courts. 

    The Education Department’s Title IX overhaul comes amid a swell of laws enacted in Republican-led states in recent years that are aimed at transgender youth. More than 20 states restrict treatments like puberty-blocking drugs, hormone therapy or surgeries for minors experiencing gender dysphoria. The constitutionality of one of those laws, from Tennessee, will be reviewed by the Supreme Court in the fall.

    At least 11 states have laws on the books that bar transgender people from using bathrooms and other facilities consistent with their gender identity in schools, and 25 states prohibit transgender girls from competing on their schools’ female sports teams.

    Jan Crawford

    contributed to this report.

    Melissa Quinn

    Melissa Quinn is a politics reporter for CBSNews.com. She has written for outlets including the Washington Examiner, Daily Signal and Alexandria Times. Melissa covers U.S. politics, with a focus on the Supreme Court and federal courts.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Judge temporarily blocks expanded Title IX LGBTQ student protections in 4 states

    Judge temporarily blocks expanded Title IX LGBTQ student protections in 4 states

    [ad_1]

    The Biden administration’s new Title IX rule expanding protections for LGBTQ+ students has been temporarily blocked in four states after a federal judge in Louisiana found that it overstepped the Education Department’s authority.

    In a preliminary injunction granted Thursday, U.S. District Judge Terry A. Doughty called the new rule an “abuse of power” and a “threat to democracy.” His order blocks the rule in Louisiana, which filed a challenge to the rule in April, and in Mississippi, Montana and Idaho, which joined the suit.

    The Education Department did not immediately respond to the order.

    The Louisiana case is among at least seven backed by more than 20 Republican-led states fighting Biden’s rule. The rule, set to take hold in August, expands Title IX civil rights protections to LGBTQ+ students, expands the definition of sexual harassment at schools and colleges, and adds safeguards for victims.

    Doughty, who was appointed by former President Donald Trump, is the first judge to block the rule. It deals a major blow to the new protections, which were praised by civil rights advocates but drew backlash from opponents who say they undermine the spirit of Title IX, a 1972 law barring sex discrimination in education.

    Louisiana is among several Republican states with laws requiring people to use bathrooms and locker rooms based on their sex assigned at birth, restricting transgender students from using facilities that align with their gender identity. President Biden’s rule clashes with those laws and claimed to supersede them.

    The Louisiana lawsuit argued that the new rule would force schools across the four states to pay millions of dollars to update their facilities. In his decision, the judge called it an “invasion of state sovereignty” and concluded that the states were likely to succeed on the merits of the case.

    His order says the rule likely violates free speech laws by requiring schools to use pronouns requested by students. It also questions whether the Biden administration has legal authority to expand Title IX to LGBTQ+ students.

    “The Court finds that the term ‘sex discrimination’ only included discrimination against biological males and females at the time of enactment,” Doughty wrote in his order.

    The judge expressed concern that the rule could require schools to allow transgender women and girls to compete on female sports teams. Several Republican states have laws forbidding transgender girls from competing on girls teams.

    The Biden administration has proposed a separate rule that would forbid such blanket bans, but it said the newly finalized rule does not apply to athletics. Still, Doughty said it could be interpreted to apply to sports.

    “The Final Rule applies to sex discrimination in any educational ‘program’ or ‘activity’ receiving Federal financial assistance,” he wrote. “The terms ‘program’ or ‘activity’ are not defined but could feasibly include sports teams for recipient schools.”

    Judges in at least six other cases are weighing whether to put a similar hold on Biden’s rule. The Defense of Freedom Institute, a right-leaning nonprofit that backed the Louisiana lawsuit, applauded Doughty’s order.

    “We are confident that other courts and states will soon follow,” said Bob Eitel, president of the nonprofit and a Trump administration education official.

    Biden issued the new rule after dismantling another one created by Trump’s education secretary, Betsy DeVos. That rule narrowed the definition of sexual harassment and added protections for students accused of sexual misconduct.

    On social media Thursday, DeVos called the Louisiana decision a victory, saying Biden’s “anti-woman radical rewrite of Title IX is not just crazy but it’s also illegal.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link