The U.S. Department of Education (DOE) has recently issued a directive instructing colleges and K-12 schools to comply with the 2020 Title IX rule, which only acknowledges two sexes: male and female. This instruction follows a federal judge’s ruling in January that the 2024 Title IX rule was unconstitutional. Initially proposed by the Biden administration, the 2024 rule aimed to expand Title IX protections to LGBTQI+ students and employees, covering discrimination based on gender identity and sexual orientation, although it faced numerous legal challenges and was blocked in several states.
Federal Judge’s Ruling and Impact
Craig Trainor, the acting assistant secretary for civil rights at the DOE, emphasized the necessity to reassess ongoing Title IX investigations initiated under the 2024 rule to meet the 2020 rule’s requirements. He pointed out the constitutional precedence of the President’s interpretation of the law, referencing a January 20 executive order by President Donald Trump that mandates all federal entities acknowledge only two sexes in laws safeguarding sex-based rights. This directive aligns the federal approach with the 2020 rule, effectively nullifying the broader protections sought under the Biden administration’s 2024 rule.
Supporters of the 2020 rule, including Chad Wolf from the America First Policy Institute, have praised this shift, arguing that the previous rule under the Biden administration compromised protections for women and girls in sports and other segregated arenas. They hold that reverting to the 2020 rule ensures fairness and safety in sex-segregated spaces, an essential aspect of maintaining equality and opportunity within educational environments. This perspective hinges on the belief that the inclusion of broader gender identities under Title IX could lead to an imbalance in competition and safety.
Concerns from Critics
Critics, however, strongly oppose the return to the 2020 rule, contending that it increases the risks of harassment and discrimination against vulnerable populations such as survivors of sexual violence, LGBTQ+ students, and students who are pregnant or parenting. Emma Grasso Levine from Know Your IX has voiced significant concerns that this decision would strip these students of essential accommodations necessary for their safety and ability to attend classes. They argue that the sweeping protections under the 2024 rule were crucial in addressing and mitigating various forms of discrimination within educational institutions.
The disagreement highlights the broader struggle over the definition and implementation of fairness within educational settings. Opponents of the 2020 rule worry that the return to more restrictive interpretations of sex discrimination could undermine progress made in creating inclusive, safe, and supportive environments for all students.
Broader Implications and Future Directions
The DOE’s directive for colleges and K-12 schools to adhere to the 2020 Title IX rule, which recognizes only two sexes, follows a federal judge’s ruling that the 2024 Title IX rule was unconstitutional. The 2024 rule, proposed by the Biden administration, aimed to expand protections to LGBTQI+ students and employees, addressing discrimination based on gender identity and sexual orientation. However, this rule encountered numerous legal obstacles and was blocked in several states. As a result, institutions must now follow the preexisting 2020 guidelines, which do not offer the expanded protections envisioned in the 2024 rule. The debate over how Title IX should address gender identity and sexual orientation continues, creating uncertainty for educational institutions and their efforts to provide inclusive environments for all students and staff. The controversy surrounding the 2024 rule highlights ongoing tensions and differing views on interpreting and applying federal anti-discrimination protections.
