Open in App
  • Local
  • U.S.
  • Election
  • Politics
  • Crime
  • Sports
  • Lifestyle
  • Education
  • Real Estate
  • Newsletter
  • WashingtonExaminer

    Federal appeals court refuses to lift order blocking Biden administration’s Title IX rule

    By Ailin Vilches Arguello,

    21 hours ago

    https://img.particlenews.com/image.php?url=3vjxlq_0uVuLrIQ00

    A federal appeals court refused to lift a judge’s order to temporarily halt the Biden administration ’s Title IX rule.

    The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a federal district judge’s preliminary injunction, blocking the new Title IX rule in six states: Kentucky , Indiana , Ohio , Tennessee , Virginia , and West Virginia .

    “As we see it, the district court likely concluded correctly that the Rule’s definition of sex discrimination exceeds the U.S. Education Department ’s authority,” a three-judge panel said in its majority ruling.

    Kentucky Attorney General Russell Coleman praised the latest ruling as “a victory for common sense.”

    “For 50 years, Title IX has created equal opportunities for women and young girls in the classroom and on the field,” Coleman said.

    “Today, the 6th Circuit becomes the first appellate court in the nation to stop President Biden ’s blatant assault on these fundamental protections.”

    Chris Hartman, Fairness Campaign executive director, a Kentucky-based LGBT advocacy group, argued the ruling could endanger transgender children .

    “We believe Kentucky schools have an obligation to protect all students , including transgender students, and that they should implement the new Title IX Rule regardless of the 6th Circuit’s opinion,” Hartman said in a statement.

    Enacted in 1972, Title IX bars federally funded educational institutions from sex-based discrimination, applying to most schools from preschool through college.

    Under the April revisions, transgender students would receive more protections regarding preferred pronoun usage and access to school facilities.

    Republicans argue that these rules could force schools to allow transgender students to access “girls’ private spaces” like bathrooms and locker rooms.

    On the contrary, Democrats claim that these revisions aim to broaden Title IX civil rights protections for LGBT students, redefine sexual harassment at schools and colleges , and enhance protections for victims.

    While this regulation is set to take effect on Aug. 1, judges have temporarily halted its enforcement as legal challenges proceed in nine other states: Alaska , Idaho , Kansas , Louisiana , Mississippi , Montana , Texas , Utah , and Wyoming .

    Moreover, this regulation is contested in 12 other states: Alabama , Arkansas , Florida , Georgia , Iowa , Missouri , Nebraska , North Dakota , Oklahoma , Oregon , South Dakota , and South Carolina .

    Yet, these states have not stopped its enforcement.

    Last month, Kentucky U.S. District Judge Danny C. Reeves, when granting the preliminary injunction, claimed that Title IX aimed to “level the playing field” between men and women in education .

    However, he said the department was trying to “derail deeply rooted law” with the new policy.

    “At bottom, the department would turn Title IX on its head by redefining ‘sex’ to include ‘ gender identity,’” he said in his ruling.

    “But ‘sex’ and ‘gender identity’ do not mean the same thing. The department’s interpretation conflicts with the plain language of Title IX and therefore exceeds its authority to promulgate regulations under that statute.”

    The appeals court ruling included a partial dissent from one member of the three-judge panel.

    “All three members of the panel, it bears emphasis, agree that these central provisions of the Rule should not be allowed to go into effect on August 1,” the majority ruling said.

    “Our modest disagreement turns on the question, in this emergency setting, of whether the other parts of the Rule can be separated from these central provisions.”

    Last week, the House approved a resolution aimed at reversing the Biden administration’s massive overhaul of Title IX .

    “Today is a great day for our daughters and granddaughters, who deserve protection from Joe Biden’s radical attempt to force men into their private spaces and athletics,” said Rep. Mary Miller (R-IL), who sponsored the bill, in a statement.

    “Title IX guarantees equal opportunities for girls in education and sports , but Joe Biden is putting our girls at risk by erasing their Title IX protections and claiming biological men should have access to girls’ bathrooms and locker rooms. Parents are horrified that Joe Biden is ignoring parental rights and forcing his leftwing agenda into our local schools.”

    CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

    The bill faces low probabilities of advancing in the Senate . Even if it does, the White House has already threatened to veto it .

    “The department’s rule is critical to ensuring that no person experiences sex discrimination at school,” the veto threat states. “Passage of H.J. Res. 165 would eliminate these critical protections that keep students safe and able to realize their full potential.”

    Expand All
    Comments / 0
    Add a Comment
    YOU MAY ALSO LIKE
    Most Popular newsMost Popular

    Comments / 0