Restoring Title IX, protecting students

On June 17, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky issued a blockbuster ruling. At stake? The very definition of gender. The court made the right call. The fact that the ruling was issued during the month of June makes it all the more powerful.

This is the background. In April of this year, the Department of Education released new Title IX regulations that were to take effect on Aug. 1, 2024. Title IX is the 1972 law that prohibits discrimination in educational institutions based on sex. Schools that fail to comply with Title IX, and are not granted an exemption, are ineligible to receive federal funding. The updated regulations move beyond sex discrimination as traditionally understood to include discrimination “based on sex stereotypes, sexual orientation, gender identity, and sex characteristics.” According to Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona, the purpose of the new regulations is to “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.”

Not everyone agrees with Secretary Cardona. Six states—Tennessee, Kentucky, Ohio, Indiana, Virginia, and West Virginia—filed suit in District Court in late April to prevent the implementation of the new regulations. Shortly thereafter, the lawsuit was joined by Christian Educators Association International and a 15-year-old female student athlete from West Virginia. Chief Judge Danny Reeves ruled against the Department of Education, granting the injunction and taking to task the Biden administration for its “arbitrary and capricious rulemaking” that would result in “immediate and irreparable harm” to the plaintiffs.

The details make this decision especially important. The first sentence of the ruling states unequivocally: “There are two sexes: male and female.” Furthermore, an accompanying footnote says the defendants—the Department of Education—made this concession during oral arguments. In other words, a department of the Biden administration admitted in court what both Scripture and science confirm to be true—a binary understanding of human sex.

The court also argues that the new rules violate the plaintiffs’ First Amendment rights. The Department of Education contests this particular objection. However, “Despite these assurances [from the Biden administration], the plaintiffs contend that the text of the regulation and the Department’s past action speaks for itself.” Simply put, the court agrees that the plaintiffs’ constitutional concerns are valid. It’s worth quoting the decision at length:

The Final Rule also has serious First Amendment implications. The rule includes a new definition of sexual harassment which may require educators to use pronouns consistent with a student’s purported gender identity rather than their biological sex. Based on the “pervasive” nature of pronoun usage in everyday life, educators likely would be required to use students’ preferred pronouns regardless of whether doing so conflicts with the educator’s religious or moral beliefs. A rule that compels speech and engages in such viewpoint discrimination is impermissible.

Notably, the ruling also deems the new regulations incompatible with the original intention of Title IX, noting “The Department’s new definition of ‘discrimination on the basis of sex’ wreaks havoc on Title IX and produces results that Congress could not have intended.” Furthermore, “The Department fails to provide a reasoned explanation for departing from its longstanding interpretations regarding the meaning of sex and provided virtually no answers to many of the difficult questions that arose during the public comment phase.”

The timing of this court decision could not be better. The month of June has devolved into an annual celebration of sexual deviancy. President Joe Biden issues Pride Month proclamations and hosts related celebrations at the White House. Homes, businesses, government buildings, and liberal churches fly rainbow flags to demonstrate their progressive bona fides. Drag queens parade through the streets of communities. Corporate America bends over backwards to prove its progressive bona fides to LGBTQ activists. Pride Month is an annual reminder of just how far American society has strayed from its Judeo-Christian heritage.

Progressives believe they are on the “right side of history” when it comes to gender and sexuality. With a nod to William F. Buckley’s famous editorial in the first issue of National Review, it is refreshing to see at least one court now “stands athwart history, yelling stop, at a time when no one is inclined to do so, or to have much patience with those who so urge it.” Though this decision will certainly be appealed, the ruling is a decisive win for Biblically orthodox Christians and other social conservatives. We should pray for, and labor towards, future decisions that help restore sanity to the growing world of sexual anarchy.