Title IX Doesn't Protect LGBTQ Students - Ruling
Determination May Be Contrary to Law and Likely to be Reversed
The decision, set forth in a memorandum, states that the agency's Office for Civil Rights [OCR] should consider only certain kinds of discrimination based on LGBTQ factors, and that the word "sex" means "biological sex, male and female."
So, for example, since Title IX permits schools to have separate restrooms, locker rooms, and shower facilities based upon "sex," a transgender student not permitted to use such a sex-segregated facility based upon sexual identity, rather than biological-anatomical sex, would not have a valid complaint of illegal discrimination under Title IX.
Such a position appears to directly contradict several recent federal appeals court decisions.
It also appears inconsistent with the Supreme Court's recent landmark ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County in which it held that "sex" under Title VII (a closely related federal statute) should be interpreted to include LGBTQ people when they face discrimination based on their sexual orientation or gender identity.
But says Banzhaf, who twice championed protections for LGBTQ students at his own university, this ruling is likely to be reversed very quickly after Joe Biden becomes president, and his nominee for education secretary,
Miguel Cardona, heads the department.
JOHN F. BANZHAF III, B.S.E.E., J.D., Sc.D.
Professor of Public Interest Law
George Washington University Law School
"The Man Behind the Ban on Cigarette Commercials"
FAMRI Dr. William Cahan Distinguished Professor
Fellow, World Technology Network
Founder, Action on Smoking and Health (ASH)
Inventor of the "Banzhaf Index"
2000 H Street, NW
Washington, DC 20052, USA
(202) 994-7229 // (703) 527-8418