The U.S. Supreme Court has blocked a new rule from the Biden administration intended to protect students from discrimination based on gender identity.
The new federal rule, issued by the Biden administration in April and went into effect on August 1, expanded the parameters of Title IX, a 1972 law that bars sex discrimination in schools receiving funding from the federal government. The rule sought to include gender identity into the language preventing discrimination “on the basis of sex.”
“For more than 50 years, Title IX has promised an equal opportunity to learn and thrive in our nation’s schools free from sex discrimination,” U.S. Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona said when the rule was announced in April. “These final regulations build on the legacy of Title IX by clarifying that all our nation’s students can access schools that are safe, welcoming, and respect their rights.”
Ten Republican-led states challenged the rule, suing to block it from taking effect in their jurisdictions. The Supreme Court issued a court order on August 16 rejecting a request by the White House to be allowed to partially lift lower court injunctions that had blocked the rule as the litigation moved forward. The lower court decisions had prevented the Department of Education from enforcing the rule in Tennessee, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Idaho, Kentucky, Ohio, Indiana, Virginia, and West Virginia. The New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and the Cincinnati-based 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals both denied requests to partially enforce the rule, prompting the administration to seek intervention from the Supreme Court.
The decision to reject the request was made by a vote of 5-4 and left unsigned, as is common for emergency petitions.
“Importantly,” the unsigned order said, “all members of the court today accept that the plaintiffs were entitled to preliminary injunctive relief as to three provisions of the rule, including the central provision that newly defines sex discrimination to include discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.”
Justice Sonia Sotomayor, writing for the liberal wing and Justice Neil M. Gorsuch, issued a partial dissent arguing the court should have allowed undisputed parts of the new rule to go into effect.
While Jonathan Skrmetti, the attorney general of Tennessee, said the outcome was “a win for student privacy, free speech, and the rule of law,” LGBTQ advocates believe the decision blocks the implementation of necessary protections for young people.
“It is disappointing that the Supreme Court has allowed far-right forces to stop the implementation of critical civil rights protections for youth,” Cathryn Oakley, the senior director of legal policy for the Human Rights Campaign, said.
The court is expected to make a decision regarding trans youth next term, which begins in October, with a case involving the constitutionality of a law in Tennessee banning certain gender-affirming medical treatments for minors.