Law & Courts

High Court Declines Challenge to District Policy Protecting Transgender Students

By Mark Walsh — December 15, 2020 2 min read
This Oct. 4, 2018, photo shows the U.S. Supreme Court at sunset in Washington. The Supreme Court has declined to take up an appeal from parents in Oregon who want to prevent transgender students from using locker rooms and bathrooms matching their gender identity.
  • Save to favorites
  • Print

The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to take up the appeal of a group of parents and students who objected to an Oregon school district’s policy of allowing transgender students to use restrooms, locker rooms, and showers matching their gender identity.

The challengers sued over the policy of the 3,000-student Dallas, Ore., school district, which adopted its student safety plan after a student at Dallas High School who was born biologically female began identifying as male in 2015. The plan allowed the student to use facilities matching his gender identity and included training for staff and lessons for students against bullying and harassment.

The parents and students objected to the policy as a form of sex discrimination that violated Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, as well arguing that their parental and privacy rights were infringed.

Both a federal district court and a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, in San Francisco, upheld the school district’s policy.

“We ... hold that a policy that treats all students equally does not discriminate based on sex in violation of Title IX, and that the normal use of privacy facilities does not constitute actionable sexual harassment under Title IX just because a person is transgender,” the 9th Circuit panel ruled in February. “We hold further that the Fourteenth Amendment does not provide a fundamental parental right to determine the bathroom policies of the public schools to which parents may send their children.”

In their appeal of that ruling in Parents for Privacy v. Barr (Case No. 20-62), the parents and students (and two parental organizations) said the district’s policy “interferes with parents’ rights to direct the upbringing of their children, schoolchildren’s rights to bodily privacy, parents’ and children’s rights to free exercise of religion, and children’s rights to be free from hostile educational environments under Title IX.”

The appeal also said the case would give the justices the chance to address questions left unanswered in their June decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, Ga., which held that transgender employees were protected by federal anti-discrimination law.

The Dallas district, in a brief urging the high court not to hear the case, pointed out that the transgender boy who inspired the policy used facilities corresponding to his gender identity without incident before graduating.

The challengers “are not using Title IX to ensure that they have equal access to bathrooms and locker rooms as compared to members outside their protected class. Rather, they are trying to use Title IX to take away something which the school district granted the transgender boy to ensure that he was not denied equal access to bathrooms or locker rooms just because his gender did not match the gender typically associated with his sex at birth.”

The justices on Dec. 7 declined without comment to hear the parents’ and students’ appeal.

Events

Jobs Virtual Career Fair for Teachers and K-12 Staff
Find teaching jobs and other jobs in K-12 education at the EdWeek Top School Jobs virtual career fair.
Ed-Tech Policy Webinar Artificial Intelligence in Practice: Building a Roadmap for AI Use in Schools
AI in education: game-changer or classroom chaos? Join our webinar & learn how to navigate this evolving tech responsibly.
Education Webinar Developing and Executing Impactful Research Campaigns to Fuel Your Ed Marketing Strategy 
Develop impactful research campaigns to fuel your marketing. Join the EdWeek Research Center for a webinar with actionable take-aways for companies who sell to K-12 districts.

EdWeek Top School Jobs

Teacher Jobs
Search over ten thousand teaching jobs nationwide — elementary, middle, high school and more.
View Jobs
Principal Jobs
Find hundreds of jobs for principals, assistant principals, and other school leadership roles.
View Jobs
Administrator Jobs
Over a thousand district-level jobs: superintendents, directors, more.
View Jobs
Support Staff Jobs
Search thousands of jobs, from paraprofessionals to counselors and more.
View Jobs

Read Next

Law & Courts Supreme Court Declines to Hear School District's Transgender Restroom Case
The case asked whether federal law protects transgender students on the use of school facilities that correspond to their gender identity.
4 min read
People stand on the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court on Feb. 11, 2022, in Washington, D.C.
People stand on the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court on Feb. 11, 2022, in Washington, D.C.
Mariam Zuhaib/AP
Law & Courts What a Proposed Ban on AI-Assisted ‘Deep Fakes’ Would Mean for Cyberbullying
Students who create AI-generated, intimate images of their classmates would be breaking federal law, if a new bill is enacted.
2 min read
AI Education concept in blue: A robot hand holding a pencil.
iStock/Getty
Law & Courts Supreme Court Declines Case on Corporal Punishment for Student With Autism
The justices refused to hear the appeal of an 11-year-old Louisiana student who alleges that two educators slapped her on her wrists.
3 min read
The Supreme Court building is seen on Capitol Hill in Washington, Jan. 10, 2023.
The Supreme Court building is seen on Capitol Hill in Washington, Jan. 10, 2023.
Patrick Semansky/AP
Law & Courts U.S. Supreme Court Declines Bid to Rename 'Brown v. Board of Education'
Descendants argued that their case, not the one from Topeka, Kan., should have topped the 1954 decision on racial segregation in schools.
3 min read
Linda Brown Smith stands in front of the Sumner School in Topeka, Kan., on May 8, 1964. The refusal of the public school to admit Brown in 1951, then nine years old, because she is black, led to the Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas. In 1954, the U.S. Supreme Court overruled the "separate but equal" clause and mandated that schools nationwide must be desegregated.
Linda Brown Smith stands in front of the Sumner School in Topeka, Kan., in 1964, a segregated white school where she had been denied enrollment in 1951, leading to the landmark 1954 U.S. Supreme Court decision striking down the "separate but equal" doctrine in the case that bears her family name, <i>Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka.</i> The high court on Jan. 8 turned away an effort by descendants of the litigants in a companion desegregation case from South Carolina to rename the historic decision for their case, <i>Briggs</i> v. <i>Elliott</i>.
AP