This Department of Education memo, from the Office for Civil Rights, is a well-reasoned rejoinder to the Bostock decision, taking the justices at their word and protecting sex-based Title IX rights.
www2.ed.gov/about/offices/…
www2.ed.gov/about/offices/…
“Title IX, for example, contains numerous exceptions authorizing or allowing sex-separate activities and intimate facilities to be provided separately on the basis of biological sex or for members of each biological sex.”
“[The] Department’s longstanding construction of the term “sex” in Title IX to mean biological sex, male or female, is the only construction consistent with the ordinary public meaning of “sex” at the time of Title IX’s enactment.”
Let’s hope the courts at least read this.
Let’s hope the courts at least read this.
After Bostock, some said that the justices should be taken at their word, and we should be glad that they’d only broken the definition of sex in Title VII employment law.
In contrast, almost every mainstream observer expected the redefinition to apply to all civil rights law.
In contrast, almost every mainstream observer expected the redefinition to apply to all civil rights law.
Certainly, courts who’ve been asked to interpret civil rights law related to other aspects of gender identity suits have mainly gone that latter way, treating Bostock as a directive from above to endorse global self-identification of sex, in contradiction to material accuracy.
So it’s refreshing to see public officials looking to preserve Title IX rights for their intended purpose, which was to redress persistent discrimination against girls & women in education, by preserving the single-sex accommodations that allow us to freely engage in public life.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
