Arizona’s chief educator is advising districts and charter schools to consult with legal counsel to determine if they should delay implementing controversial new federal Title IX guidelines.
Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne is concerned that the changes may cause students to suffer damages.
The new regulations are set to take effect on August 1 and face multiple legal challenges.
In a letter sent to district and charter school administrators, Horne said, “This is your choice, but you may wish to delay implementing the new regulations until the legal situation is clarified. If the regulations are implemented and then later overruled by the courts, students may suffer damages in the meantime.”
“In the past I’ve been asked by districts, as a policy matter, about their consideration of rules, permitting biological boys who have male genitalia being allowed in girls’ bathrooms, locker rooms, and showers,” said Horne. “My response was that there should be unisex bathrooms available, and if there was no room for them, the faculty bathroom should be used for that purpose. That would preserve the dignity of biological boys who identify as girls. But if they were allowed in girls’ facilities, I thought parents might well remove the girls from the school and send them to another district, Charter School, or private school. So, this rule could significantly injure public education.”
Horne noted that a Louisiana federal court ruling outlines the potential consequences to students if these news regulations are applied: “In Louisiana v. USDOE, the federal court described the impact of the August 1 rule as follows: ‘…requires students to be allowed access to bathrooms and locker rooms based on the gender identity [chosen, not at birth] requires schools to use whatever pronouns the student requests; and imposes additional requirements that will result in substantial costs to the school.’”
“This is not legal advice. The Arizona Attorney General may disagree… We are a local control state, and it will be up to districts and charters to determine how to proceed in this situation. You need to consult with your lawyer. I am only providing information I think might be useful,” concluded Horne.
Horne offered as an example an amicus brief to a Texas court considering whether to make its injunction against the new regulation nationwide, in which it was pointed out that “the Governing Board of the Dysart District in Arizona adopted a resolution on July 11, 2024, affirming its commitment to the pre-Final rule interpretation of Title IX, formally affirming that the Final Rule is contrary to the statutory text.”
RELATED ARTICLE:
Arizona School District Governing Board Rejects Biden Administration’s Rewrite Of Title IX