Federal judge strikes down Biden Title IX rules

A federal judge in Kentucky struck down changes made to Title IX by the Biden administration Thursday, ruling that the new regulations, which had sought to expand nondiscrimination protections for LGBTQ students, violate the Constitution.

The Education Department unveiled a final set of sweeping changes to Title IX, the federal civil rights law preventing sex discrimination in schools and education programs that receive government funding, in April, including modifying what the law considers sex discrimination to include discrimination linked to gender identity and sexuality.

More than a dozen Republican-led states sued the Biden administration over the changes, which they argued undermined the landmark law’s original intent of guaranteeing equal opportunities for men and women. Federal courts had already halted the rule from taking effect in 26 states.

Several conservative leaders, including President-elect Trump, claimed the new regulations would have allowed transgender student-athletes to participate in women’s sports. In December, the Biden administration withdrew a separate proposal meant to address athletics eligibility.

Thursday’s decision came in response to a lawsuit filed by Tennessee, Kentucky, Indiana, Ohio, Virginia and West Virginia. The GOP-led states had taken issue with the new rule’s expanded definitions of sex discrimination and harassment, as well as a provision allowing transgender students to use single-sex facilities that best align with their gender identity.

Judge Danny C. Reeves of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky wrote in Thursday’s order that “the three challenged provisions fatally taint the entire rule,” which had also bolstered protections for pregnant students and made changes to guidelines for schools handling claims of sexual harassment and assault.

“Congress gave the [Education] Department authority to issue rules, regulations, and orders to effectuate Title IX’s prohibition on sex discrimination consistent with the objectives of the statute. However, the Department exceeded that authority in issuing the Final Rule and the text of Title IX shows why,” Reeves wrote Thursday.

“Put simply, there is nothing in the text or statutory design of Title IX to suggest that discrimination ‘on the basis of sex’ means anything other than it has since Title IX’s inception—that recipients of federal funds under Title IX may not treat a person worse than another similarly-situated individual on the basis of the person’s sex, i.e., male or female,” he wrote.

Reeves, an appointee of President George W. Bush, said Thursday he agrees with Republican attorneys general who argued the Biden administration’s Title IX regulations rely on a misinterpretation of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County. In that case, the court ruled that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects employees against discrimination because of their sexuality or gender identity.

The Biden administration’s Title IX rule is also “vague and overbroad” and “suffers significant constitutional infirmities,” Reeves wrote. He referenced an argument that the rule would classify misgendering a transgender student as harassment.

“The First Amendment does not permit the government to chill speech or compel affirmance of a belief with which the speaker disagrees in this manner,” Reeves wrote.

The White House and Education Department did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the ruling.

In a post on the social platform X, Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti (R) called the order a “resounding victory for the protection of girls’ privacy in locker rooms and showers, and for the freedom to speak biologically-accurate pronouns.”

Skrmetti is leading Tennessee in another high-profile case related to transgender rights; the Supreme Court in December heard oral arguments in a legal challenge to a state law barring minors from receiving transition-related care, which major medical organizations say is medically necessary.

Virginia’s Republican Attorney General Jason Miyares celebrated Thursday’s ruling in a separate post on X.

“All of America is now safe from Biden’s attempt to undermine half a century of landmark protections for women,” he wrote.

Jessica Lee, co-director of the Center for WorkLife Law, a nonprofit organization dedicated to advancing gender, racial and class equity, called the decision “shameful” and one that will put “pregnant and postpartum students, and millions of others, in harm’s way.”

“Without the protections offered by the 2024 Title IX regulations, pregnant students will struggle to get the accommodations and leave they need to both stay healthy and continue their education,” said Lee, co-founder of the organization’s Pregnant Scholar Initiative.

The Congressional Equality Caucus, which advocates for LGBTQ equality in the House, said it was disappointed by Reeve’s ruling in a post on X.

“All students deserve to attend school free from discrimination and harassment,” the group wrote.

In a statement to The Hill, Sarah Kate Ellis, president and CEO of the LGBTQ media advocacy organization GLAAD, said, “Transgender and nonbinary students are among the most vulnerable. Protections for the most vulnerable students make the entire school safer and stronger for everyone.”

GLSEN, an organization that advocates for LGBTQ students, denounced Reeves’s decision in a statement on Thursday.

“This extreme and activist decision shows a stunning indifference to marginalized youth facing harassment and discrimination, as well as hardworking school administrators and principals who are working to build safer learning environments for their increasingly diverse student populations,” said the group’s executive director, Melanie Willingham-Jaggers.

A 2021 report from the organization found that more than 80 percent of LGBTQ students have felt unsafe at school because of their identity.

“The Biden administration’s 2024 updates to Title IX provided clearer guardrails than ever before to ensure that schools were prepared to support the needs of LGBTQ+ youth, and particularly transgender students,” Willingham-Jaggers said. “We hope that immediate action is taken to appeal this unnecessarily broad decision and restore the updated regulations.”

Updated at 4:10 p.m. EST

Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

For the latest news, weather, sports, and streaming video, head to The Hill.