Seattle Attorneys Blog
The Department of Justice (“DOJ”) has requested a partial stay of the preliminary injunctions against the new Title IX Final Rule in two lawsuits involving a total of ten states. The requests to the U.S. Supreme Court involve the injunction applicable to the states of Tennessee, Kentucky, Ohio, Indiana, Virginia, and West Virginia in the lawsuit filed in the Eastern District of Kentucky and the injunction applicable to the states of Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, and Idaho in the lawsuit filed in the Western District of Pennsylvania. The DOJ asked the Court to issue stays to the extent the injunctions prohibit implementation of the portions of the Final Rule that were not challenged in the underlying lawsuits, arguing the plaintiffs had not challenged the “vast majority” of the changes made by the Final Rule.
The DOJ argued the district courts erred in enjoining the portions of the Final Rule that the plaintiffs had not challenged because of the principle that equitable relief is to be tailored to the alleged injuries and claims.
It also argued the courts erred by “enjoining Section 106.10’s clarification that Title IX prohibits discrimination based on gender identity.” It further argued that the plaintiff’s alleged injuries could have been redressed with an injunction of “Section 106.31(a)(2) and Section 106.2’s definition of hostile-environment harassment as applied to gender-identity discrimination.” Furthermore, it argued the inclusion of gender-identity discrimination in Section 106.10 was required by the Court’s decision in Bostock v. Clayton County.
According to the DOJ, the equities weigh in favor of a partial stay because the current injunction would bar the Department of Education from implementing a large number of provisions in the Final Rule that protect students from sex discrimination. The plaintiffs would not be harmed by a partial stay because the parts of the Final Rule that were the source of their asserted injuries would still be enjoined.
The Title IX Final Rule is scheduled to take effect August 1, 2024. Although there has not been a nationwide injunction of the entire Final Rule, there are a number of injunctions prohibiting its implementation against a total of twenty-one states, along with a number of plaintiffs. The Northern District of Texas enjoined implementation and enforcement of the Final Rule against the state of Texas and two individual plaintiffs. The District of Kansas issued a preliminary injunction barring implementation and enforcement of the Final Rule against the states of Kansas, Alaska, Utah, and Wyoming, schools attended by the members of Young America’s Foundation or Female Athletes United, schools attended by the children of the members of Moms for Liberty and the school of an individual plaintiff. The Eastern District of Missouri issued a preliminary injunction prohibiting the implementation or enforcement of the Final Rule against the states of Arkansas, Missouri, Iowa, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota, as well as an individual plaintiff.
Washington state is not subject to an injunction. Until the litigation is resolved, however, schools are likely to face confusion about what rules and requirements apply. If you or your child are facing allegations of sexual misconduct or sexual harassment at school, a skilled Washington Title IX defense attorney can help you understand your rights and fight to protect them. Contact Blair & Kim, PLLC, at (206) 622-6562 to set up a consultation.