Hartzler, Lankford Lead Amicus Brief Urging Reversal in Title IX Case

Press Release

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (R-Mo.) and Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) led 80 Members of Congress in an amicus brief to the United States Supreme Court on Tuesday. The brief urged the High Court to reverse a misconstrued 4th Circuit Court of Appeals decision requiring a Virginia school to open up its restrooms to members of the opposite sex despite prevailing federal law, student privacy concerns, and accommodations provided by the local school.

Hartzler, a vocal advocate for state and local control of the issue, asserted, "As I have said in the past, not only is this action unlawful, but it compromises the privacy and threatens the safety of our students. Time and again, the Obama Administration has ignored the separation of powers and intentionally bypassed congressional authority to enact its political agenda. Unelected Washington bureaucrats should not dictate basic policy to our schools, especially when it involves an issue as consequential as this one. Decisions regarding the wellbeing of students should be left in the capable hands of the school districts and local leaders, and legislation should be left in the hands of Congress."

The case, Gloucester County School Board v G.G., concerns the unconstitutionality of the Department of Education's (DOE) overreaching reinterpretation of Title IX. Title IX is a portion of Education Amendments of 1972 which prohibits discrimination on the basis of biological sex in any federally funded education program or activity. Recent DOE guidance expanded the definition to encompass gender identity and threatened to pull federal funding for schools that declined to allow female students to use male restrooms, shower facilities or locker rooms, or vice versa.

The amicus brief informs the U.S. Supreme Court that:

Title IX's prohibition of "sex" discrimination does not encompass "gender identity."
The Department of Education's interpretation of Title IX to include "gender identity" is not entitled to Auer deference because Congress would not have delegated such a sensitive issue to a federal agency.
The Department of Education's interpretation of Title IX to include "gender identity" violates the spending clause.

Source