Josh Block, senior staff lawyer with the American Civil Liberties Union LGBTQ & HIV Project, stated that Gavin's case was already very influential and would continue to be so beyond the 4th Circuit.Mississippi, Montana and West Virginia signed transgender athlete restrictions in this year's Alabama, Mississippi, Montana, Florida West Virginia, Tennessee, Arkansas, Arkansas, and Tennessee. Many of them criticized President Joe Biden's January executive order, which was intended to encourage inclusion for transgender persons. The White House changed the argument, arguing that a Supreme Court ruling regarding LGBTQ rights in the workplace extends into a federal education law prohibiting discrimination based upon sex.Since the Bostock v. Clayton County landmark ruling last summer, the Supreme Court has twice ruled against transgender bathroom cases. Biden is still relying on this decision. Two other circuits issued similar rulings to the 4th Circuit. They ruled that it was unconstitutional for transgender students to use bathrooms that are compatible with their gender identities. This means Grimms victories in 4th Circuit will likely continue for the foreseeable future. However, a number of courts will decide if these circuit court precedents have any bearing on transgender athlete cases. This is just as students begin to try out for fall sports."The court must decide if attempts to ban trans children from sporting teams are more justified under increased scrutiny than laws banning trans people from using the toilets." Block stated.These are the three most important things you need to know about transgender sport restrictionsThree key challenges in state law are worth paying attention toACLU and other civil right groups filed lawsuits against Idaho and West Virginia over transgender student sports team participation laws. The ACLU also promised to file more challenges against Florida, Tennessee.Block stated that this is not the Olympics. It's just kids trying to live normal lives and playing after-school sports with friends.All the lawsuits claim that the laws violate Title IX, an education law that prohibits discrimination based on sex.Idaho: Idaho's law has been remanded to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The fate of similar laws passed in other states this year could be affected by the ruling.The Idaho Governor. In March 2020, Idaho Gov. ACLU quickly challenged the law on behalf of Lindsay Hecox, transgender track star, who applied for the Boise State track program. Jane Doe, a cisgender women, was also concerned about the medical testing she would have to undergo in order to prove that she was not transgender. Trump's legal support also came from the state law.A district court granted temporary pause to the law last summer while proceedings were ongoing to allow Hecox the opportunity to play for the team in fall.West Virginia: The Mountain State has become the second state to enforce its ban on transgender athletes in court. ACLU filed a lawsuit for Becky Pepper-Jackson (11-year-old transgender middle-schooler who would like to be a part of her school's cross-country girls team). The state law goes into effect on July 8. Team practices begin this month.Florida: The Florida Human Rights Campaign, a LGBTQ civil rights group, filed a lawsuit this week challenging Florida's law. Ron DeSantis signed the June 1st Pride Month Day Declaration.HRC filed the challenge for a 13 year old transgender student who uses the pseudonym Daisy. Daisy is a multisport athlete and goalie on three soccer teams. Her lawyers argued that the law would prevent her from playing on the girls' team. This would also be detrimental to her academic, social, and personal safety.It is worth noting that Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative non-profit, is suing Connecticut's high school sports authority as well as five school boards for their policy allowing transgender students to play on women's sports teams. This group is suing four female high school track and field athletes who are cisgender.A District Court Judge dismissed the suit in April. ADF appealed the decision at the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals.According to Robert Chatigny (a U.S. District of Connecticut senior Judge), courts across the country have held that Title IX mandates schools to treat transgender students in accordance with their gender identity. The issue has been considered by every Court of Appeals.Students have been supported by the Biden administrationThe Education Department released a revised interpretation of Title IX in June. The law now prohibits discrimination based upon sexual orientation or gender identity. This is a significant reversal of the Trump administration's repeal of Obama-era protections for transgender persons.This interpretation is based upon the Supreme Court decision in Bostock v. Clayton County. The opinion on transgender rights at work stated that it didn't address the right to use locker rooms or bathrooms, and the Supreme Court has not yet taken up the case.Biden Justice Department already took action to defend transgender girls' rights to participate in sports by calling West Virginia's law unconstitutional in its statement in interest in Pepper-Jacksons.Which government directive is the most authoritative?Schools are caught between state laws and federal mandates as the fight over transgender athletes rights heats up at the local level.One important aspect of school operations is what schools should do? Francisco Negron (the National School Boards Associations chief lawyer) spoke this week at an Education Writers Association roundtable. There are competing constitutional and statutory mandates. Remember that schools are created by state law and, in many cases, their first order is to comply with state law.The Education Departments Office for Civil Rights has pledged to enforce Title IX in all programs and activities that receive federal financial aid from the agency. It is not clear what steps the department will take in order to enforce Title IX in states where transgender girls and women are prohibited from participating in sports teams that reflect their gender identity.Negron stated that schools could lose federal funds if they do not follow this policy as federal fund recipients. Although they have not been withheld in the past, it is possible.Andrew Atterbury contributed to the report.
