WASHINGTON (CN) — The Biden administration on Monday asked the Supreme Court to limit a lower court ruling throwing out the federal government’s interpretation of Title IX’s protections for transgender students.
With the injunction in place, the Justice Department can’t implement dozens of other provisions of the administration’s rule — like protections for new mothers — endangering the millions of students who depend on the law to prevent sex-based discrimination, U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar wrote in an emergency application,
In April, the Biden administration issued guidance on the scope and application of Title IX requirements for recipients of federal funds. Three provisions of the rule addressed gender identity discrimination, including forcing schools to allow transgender students to use restrooms and other sex-separated facilities consistent with their gender identity.
The government reasoned it is impossible to discriminate against an individual because of their gender identity without discriminating against that individual based on sex. Republican-led states said the Biden administration wanted to mandate that schools protect and promote their students’ gender identity, framing the rule as a transformation of Title IX.
While the states’ complaint addressed only the provisions for transgender students, federal judges in Louisiana and Kentucky put the entire rule on hold. The Louisiana court said Title IX only prohibits discrimination against biological males and females.
Although the Biden administration argued the gender identity provisions were severable from the rest of the rule, the Fifth and Eighth Circuits refused to narrow the injunction.
At the Supreme Court, the Biden administration said the injunction should be limited to the challenged provisions.
“Those provisions raise important issues that will be litigated on appeal and that may well require this court’s resolution in the ordinary course,” Prelogar wrote. “But the government has not asked the courts to address those provisions in an emergency posture.”
The rule also required schools to provide access to lactation spaces and to give pregnant and postpartum students and employees reasonable accommodations, like restroom breaks. It clarified definitions in Title IX regulations, provided instructions for responding to discrimination claims and amended requirements for notices and record-keeping.
Prelogar said the courts didn’t have the authority to block the entirety of the rule because the states hadn’t proved that those provisions were invalid or caused irreparable harm.
“The lower courts ignored that bedrock equitable principle by presuming that the purported legal defects they identified in three provisions of the Rule justified an injunction barring implementation of other provisions that respondents had not challenged,” Prelogar wrote.
The rule was scheduled to take effect Aug. 1.