A federal judge in Alabama refused to block the Biden administration’s adding of “gender identity” to Title IX in four Southern states, breaking the White House’s legal losing streak on the eve of the rule’s implementation.
The president’s Title IX update would ban sex discrimination in education to biological males who identify as female, spurring privacy and safety concerns about women’s locker rooms, restrooms and other sex-segregated spaces.
U.S. District Judge Annemarie Carney Axon on Tuesday rejected the motion to pause the Title IX rule pending the outcome of a lawsuit filed by Alabama, Georgia, Florida and South Carolina, as well as Parents Defending Education.
“In short, although plaintiffs may dislike the department’s rules, they have failed to show a substantial likelihood of success in proving the department’s rulemaking was unreasonable or not reasonably explained,” Judge Axon, a Trump appointee, said in the 122-page decision.
The ruling came as a shock to foes of the Title IX overhaul, given their previously unbroken track record of success.
Five other federal judges have granted temporary injunctions in 21 states as well as at least two school districts, more than 670 colleges and 2,000 K-12 schools.
Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall said he quickly appealed the decision to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals.
“We are surprised by the district court’s decision today to deny the state’s request to immediately halt Biden’s Title IX degradation,” said Mr. Marshall.
Absent an appeals court ruling in his favor, Judge Axon’s decision means the Title IX rule will take effect Thursday in those four states.
Rest assured, I have already appealed today’s Title IX decision. Alabama’s young women deserve better. pic.twitter.com/lYIBe7orRk
— Attorney General Steve Marshall (@AGSteveMarshall) July 30, 2024
The final rule released in April adds “gender identity” to Title IX, the 1972 civil rights law banning sex discrimination in education.
The Education Department said the updated regulations will “promote educational equity and opportunity,” while critics argued that the rule makes a mockery of Title IX by including biological males who identify as female.
Nelly Neily, Parents Defending Education founder and president, said, “To say we are disappointed with this opinion is an understatement.”
“We were hoping this decision would give our members the clarity they needed to begin the school year on the right foot,” she said. “However, the court’s opinion does not explain how Title IX gives the Department of Education any authority to require schools to incorporate gender ideology into restrooms, locker rooms, academic programming and athletics.”
• Valerie Richardson can be reached at vrichardson@washingtontimes.com.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.