A federal district court’s order entered on August 21, 2016, in State of Texas v. United States of America has barred the Obama Administration from enforcing its edict that public schools allow boys to use girls’ locker rooms, showers, and restrooms while the multi-state lawsuit proceeds. The court found that the federal government failed to follow the public notice and comment process, which is required by federal law. In addition, the term “sex” in Title IX is unambiguous:  Congress intended the word to refer to the “biological differences between male and female students.” In a related case, the Thomas More Society represents over 50 families who have sued the government in Students and Parents for Privacy v. United States Department of Education.

“The Obama administration has attempted to unilaterally rewrite science, history, and the law by creating a new definition of the word ‘sex.’  We’re pleased that the court in Texas has recognized that and made a clear finding that the term, as used in Title IX, is unambiguous and that the Department of Education has no authority to ‘interpret’ it beyond its clear meaning,” said Jocelyn Floyd, associate counsel for the Thomas More Society.

Floyd, who represents the families in Students and Parents for Privacy v. United States Department of Education, asked the court to halt policies that have allowed restrooms in a Palatine high school district to be used by members of the opposite sex and girls’ locker rooms to be used by a biological male.  The U.S. Department of Education had threatened the district with the removal of the school’s federal funding if this access was not granted and maintained.  

“We have filed a notice of the Texas decision with the court in our case, and we are hopeful that the court will recognize and agree that the fatal flaws in the government’s position are the same flaws presented here,” Floyd said.

Thomas More Society is encouraged by the Texas ruling, which supports the arguments made before the judge in its Palatine, IL case, as seen in the following excerpts from the judge’s order:

• “Based on the foregoing authority, the Court concludes § 106.33 is not ambiguous. It cannot be disputed that the plain meaning of the term sex as used in § 106.33 when it was enacted by DOE following passage of Title IX meant the biological and anatomical differences between male and female students as determined at their birth.” (p. 31)

• “Additionally, it cannot reasonably be disputed that DOE complied with Congressional intent when drawing the distinctions in § 106.33 based on the biological differences between male and female students. As the support identified by Plaintiffs shows, this was the common understanding of the term when Title IX was enacted, and remained the understanding during the regulatory process that led to the promulgation of § 106.33.  This undoubtedly was permitted because the areas identified by the regulations are places where male and female students may have to expose their ‘nude or partially nude body, genitalia, and other private parts,’ and separation from members of the opposite sex, those whose bodies possessed a different anatomical structure, was needed to ensure personal privacy.” (pp. 31-32)

• “Further, while this injunction remains in place, Defendants are enjoined from initiating, continuing, or concluding any investigation based on Defendants’ interpretation that the definition of sex includes gender identity in Title IX’s prohibition against discrimination on the basis of sex.” (p. 37)

Thomas More Society will continue to fight against the United States Department of Education and considers the Texas ruling another step in the direction towards restoring the rights and privacy of the young girls in Palatine, IL.

Read the State of Texas v. United States of America decision here.