WASHINGTON - Today an amicus brief at the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of the Gloucester County School Board in Virginia on the so-called transgender bathroom decision in G.G. v. Gloucester County School Board. This is the first time that the Court has addressed the question of whether laws protecting against sex discrimination in education are applicable to "gender identity."
Liberty Counsel states in the brief: "Advancements in biotechnology have demonstrated what society has intuitively understood for millennia, i.e., that human beings are conceived as either male or female and there is no scientific basis for a claim that individuals have a separate "gender identity" that can differ from their biological sex. The Department of Justice Civil Rights Division and the Department of Education Office of Civil Rights ignored this inconvenient truth when they announced that the term "sex" in Title IX now includes "gender identity" so that sex-separate private facilities must be turned into unisex social laboratories. This Court should reject the Departments' attempt to infuse Title IX with a sociopolitical agenda wholly lacking in evidentiary foundation."
The student bringing the lawsuit, Gavin Grimm, a 17-year-old high school senior, is a biological girl who now says she subjectively "identifies" as a "boy." When Grimm began using the boys' restroom, some parents complained. Then the school board adopted a policy requiring students to use either the restroom that corresponds with their biological gender or a private, single-stall restroom.
The Supreme Court previously blocked the decision by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals that the federal law known as Title IX should be interpreted to include "gender identity" and that a girl who "identifies" as a boy can use the boy's restroom. The federal court of appeals ruling lacks legal authority and clearly goes against the clear meaning of "sex" when that law was adopted decades ago.
"Liberty Counsel stands with the Gloucester School Board as its responsibility is to protect the safety of students from harmful situations," said Mat Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel. "It is absurd that the Supreme Court has to address whether a girl with gender dysphoria should be treated as a boy. The federal law does not allow persons to subjectively think, and therefore be treated, as the opposite of their biological sex. It is very obvious how the Supreme Court should rule in this case," said Staver.