On Thursday, a U.S. district court upheld President Joe Biden’s queer theory rewrite of Title IX across the country, preventing his administration from attempting to change the definition of” sex” to include alleged “gender identities.”
Kentucky U. S. District Court Chief Judge Danny C. Reeves, an appointment of President George W. Bush, blocked the Biden Department of Education’s new Title IX laws. These regulations would have required teachers to use “preferred pronouns” when referring to girls in secret spaces like bathrooms and locker rooms, and made girls rest in the same places as boys for events like immediately field trips. Additionally, the Biden laws reinstated Obama-era “kangaroo courts,” which were intended to bring forth false accusations, denying the right to due process for those accused of sexual assault on college campuses.
It is amply clear that discrimination based on gender refers to discrimination based on gender, according to Reeves. Turns Title IX on its mind by expanding the definition of “on the basis of sexual” to contain “gender personality.” The purpose of Title IX is to reduce discrimination based on sex; adding gender identity to the equation dilutes the legislation and renders it essentially meaningless.
The U.S. Supreme Court granted injunctions to be in 26 states where numerous lawsuits brought by various alliances succeeded in quashing the update. One federal judge in Louisiana struck down the update, referring to it as an “abuse of power” and a” risk to democracy”.
The Thursday decision has nationwide implications, however, because in a motion for summary judgment, the plaintiff states requested that the court exercise the power granted by the Administrative Procedures Act to vacate agency rules that are “( A ) arbitrary, capricious, an
abuse of discretion, or otherwise not by law, ( B ) contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity, ]or ] in excess of statutory jurisdiction, authority, or limitations, or short of a statutory right”, Reeves wrote.
Reeves cited a number of arguments in favor of enforcing the rules, including free conversation concerns that a funding for national education should be conditional on teachers and others using pronouns that don’t match a child’s sex, but rather their alleged gender, as well.
According to him,” The plaintiffs reasonably fear that teachers ‘ ( and others ‘ ) speech regarding gender issues or their use of gender-identity-based pronouns would constitute harassment under the Final Rule.” Simply put, the First Amendment does not require the state to censor speech or require the affirmation of a belief that the listener disagrees with.
The prosecutor noted that Title IX’s complete foundation rests on the concept of gender, and that the portions of the guideline challenged in the complaint “fatally contaminate the whole rule,” including the due process sections.
The Biden administration repeatedly cited the Supreme Court of the United States case Bostock v. Clayton County, in which Justice Neil Gorsuch ostensibly permitted the use of “gender identity” in the definition of” sex” as it pertains to employment discrimination under Title VII. Biden used that as inspiration to launch an executive order on his first time in office, directing the whole national government to use that platform to all of its decision-making.
The choice comes as a Senate bill intended to prohibit people from competing in children’s activities is scheduled for a vote in the upcoming week.
Breccan F. Thies is an votes journalist for The Federalist. He formerly covered issues of culture and education for Breitbart News and the Washington Examiner. He is a Publius Fellow at the 2022 Claremont Institute and holds a degree from the University of Virginia. You may follow him on X: @BreccanFThies.
