Biden Administration’s Title IX Protections for LGBTQ+ Students Struck Down by Federal Judge

A federal judge in Kentucky has ruled that the Biden administration’s Title IX regulations, which expanded protections for LGBTQ+ students, were unconstitutional, striking them down nationwide. The decision, issued Thursday by U.S. District Judge Danny C. Reeves, invalidated the entire 1,500-page regulation, citing what he described as “fatally” flawed legal reasoning.

The ruling is a significant blow to the administration’s effort to protect LGBTQ+ students from discrimination in education. The regulation had already faced challenges in 26 states, with Republican-led states filing lawsuits over the policy. The Title IX rule, which aimed to extend protections against discrimination on the basis of gender identity and sexual orientation, was heavily contested from the start.

Judge Reeves’ ruling came in response to a lawsuit filed by several states, including Tennessee, Kentucky, Indiana, Ohio, Virginia, and West Virginia. These states argued that the administration had overstepped its authority by broadening the scope of Title IX, a landmark 1972 law that prohibits sex-based discrimination in education.

Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti praised the decision, calling it a rebuke to the Biden administration’s “relentless push to impose a radical gender ideology.” Skrmetti added that the ruling would allow President Donald Trump, who is poised to return to office, to “take a fresh look at our Title IX regulations.”

“There’s nothing in Title IX suggesting that it should cover anything more than it has since Congress created it,” Reeves wrote in his decision. “This is an attempt to bypass the legislative process and completely transform Title IX,” the judge added.

The regulations had been finalized in 2022 by the Department of Education under President Joe Biden. They expanded the scope of Title IX to include protections for LGBTQ+ students, explicitly prohibiting discrimination based on gender identity or sexual orientation. In addition, the new rules broadened the definition of harassment to include a wider range of misconduct.

While civil rights groups lauded the changes as a victory for LGBTQ+ students, critics, primarily from conservative circles, viewed them as a threat to women’s sports and an overreach of executive power. Critics, including some prominent figures from the Trump administration, argued that the rules could allow transgender women to compete in women’s sports, which they claimed would undermine fairness.

The ruling from Judge Reeves effectively invalidates the expanded interpretation of Title IX, reverting to the previous, narrower interpretation that existed prior to the new regulation. Reeves said his decision would “simply cause a return to the status quo” that had been in place for more than five decades.

One of the most vocal opponents of the new regulations was Betsy DeVos, the former Secretary of Education under President Trump. DeVos took to social media after the ruling, calling the Biden administration’s changes to Title IX “radical, unfair, illegal, and absurd.” She expressed satisfaction with the decision, stating, “The rewrite is GONE.”

Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., who chairs the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, also condemned the regulation. He argued that Biden’s Title IX rule had “betrayed the original intent” of the law and removed important protections for women and girls.

“The goal is to ensure fairness, opportunity, and success for women and girls in the classroom and on the field,” Cassidy said in a statement, asserting that a future Republican-led government would work to safeguard these opportunities for women and girls.

The Biden administration, which had hoped to ensure greater protections for LGBTQ+ students, has not yet issued an official comment on the ruling. However, advocates for LGBTQ+ rights have expressed concern over the impact of the decision, with many fearing that it could lead to a rollback of protections for vulnerable students.

The Biden administration’s move to expand Title IX protections was seen as part of a broader push to secure civil rights for LGBTQ+ individuals. In addition to the protections in education, the administration had sought to prevent discrimination in areas such as healthcare, housing, and employment. However, the ruling from Judge Reeves represents a setback for those efforts, with further legal challenges expected to continue.

This ruling comes as the debate over LGBTQ+ rights in education remains contentious across the United States, with various states passing laws that restrict the rights of transgender students, particularly in sports. The future of Title IX and its interpretation will likely be a key issue in the upcoming election cycles, with both sides of the debate gearing up for further legal and political battles.

As the decision is expected to be appealed, it is unclear what the final resolution will be. The ruling may be reviewed by higher courts, including the U.S. Court of Appeals and, potentially, the U.S. Supreme Court