The Oldest Blog
A first amendment blog for school administrators and attorneys.
The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals recently became the first Federal appellate court to decide that a school policy separating student bathrooms based on “biological sex” “passes constitutional muster and comports with Title IX.” Three judges dissented.
According to the seven-judge majority’, bathrooms can be segregated by “biological sex” as evidenced by the student’s enrollment documents even if doing so excludes transgender students from bathrooms matching their gender identities. Such a rule is not required, but the decision gives a green light within the Eleventh Circuit’s jurisdiction (Alabama, Florida, and Georgia) for schools to choose to implement such a rule.
The decision, Adams v. School Board of St. Johns County, Florida, conflicts with decisions by two other Federal appellate courts and does not change the law in those states (Illinois, Indiana, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wisconsin). So, it may be well-suited for review by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Unless and until that happens, however, the 150-page decision adds to school leaders’ confusion about handling requests from transgender students. The case leaves many unanswered questions, even for schools within the Eleventh Circuit’s jurisdiction and jurisdictions like the Fifth Circuit (Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas), which do not have a conflicting decision. It could even raise questions for any employer subject to Title VII when addressing a request about facilities by a transgender employee. So much for legal opinions clarifying the law for us!
So, what do you need to know? Keep reading for four fundamental takeaways to help cut through the confusion on this critical case.
The post Four Fundamental Takeaways From the Eleventh Circuit’s Approval of School Transgender Bathroom Ban appeared first on Title IX Tips.
In a long-awaited decision, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals held on December 30, 2022, that a Florida school board could exclude a transgender high school student from the bathroom matching their gender identity without a constitutional or Title IX concern. A majority of the court held that restricting bathroom use by “biological sex” is proper and significantly furthers student privacy interests. Other judges dissented. That split, as well as the conflict between this decision and that in other appellate courts across the country, tees up the case for review by the U.S. Supreme Court. Read the case here: Adams v. School Board of St. Johns County, Florida.
The post 11th Circuit: Excluding Trans Students From Bathroom Not a Title IX Violation appeared first on Title IX Tips.
On November 10, 2022, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the U.S. Department of Labor Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP), the U.S. Department of Labor Veterans’ Employment and Training Service, and the U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division jointly released a comprehensive resource document detailing federal laws and other authorities that specifically protect service members and veterans from workplace discrimination. In its press release, the EEOC described the jointly authored “Protections Against Employment Discrimination for Service Members and Veterans” as the first-of-its-kind single publication intended to “help veterans and service members determine which laws and federal agencies are responsible for enforcing their workplace rights and where to seek assistance if they believe those rights have been violated.”
The post Just in Time for Veterans Day, Federal Agencies Provide Military Service Members and Veterans with Guidance on Unlawful Employment Discrimination appeared first on Educated Employer.
Ensuring the safety and security of students and staff is a priority at every school. However, school officials cannot forget
On August 30, 2022, the Southern District of Texas issued its opinion in Love v. University of St. Thomas, a case that highlights the significant burden that employees must overcome in the burden shifting analysis used by courts in employment discrimination and retaliation claims. In the absence of direct evidence of discrimination or retaliation, courts follow the United States Supreme Court’s McDonnell-Douglas framework to determine whether an employer engaged in illegal conduct. Under this framework, an employee challenging an adverse employment action must first establish a prima facie case of discrimination or retaliation before the burden shifts to the employer to provide a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for the action taken. Once the employer proffers such a reason, the burden shifts back to the employee to show that the stated reason is a pretext for discrimination or retaliation.
The post Just How Hard is it to Prove Pretext? SDTX Holds that EEOC “Cause” Finding and Allegations of Falsified Evidence are Not Enough appeared first on Educated Employer.
The recent teacher shortage has caused districts to get creative regarding schedules, student grouping, and staff assignments. But just how creative can you be when it comes to the employees in your special education classrooms? The Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) issued guidance on this topic on October 4, 2022, indicating that proper credentials will be an area of focus as we continue to navigate the post-COVID era.
The post Despite Teacher Shortage, OSEP Says IDEA Compliance Requires Certified Teachers, No Waivers appeared first on Special Education Spotlight.