JEFFERSON CITY — Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey joined several other attorneys general in filing a lawsuit against President Joe Biden in his attempt to rewrite Title IX.
Bailey argued that Biden's attempt to rewrite Title IX to allow males in female spaces is part of a radical transgender ideology.
Bailey said the Biden Administration's actions have threatened to hold federal funding hostage from any institution that rejects this unconstitutional and sexist rule.
"Joe Biden is once again exceeding his constitutional authority, this time to put a radical transgender ideology ahead of the safety of women and girls," Bailey said in a provided statement. "As the father of a young daughter, I take this personally."
Bailey was joined in the suit by attorneys general from Arkansas and Nebraska, among others.
Arkansas Attorney General Tim Griffin said in a provided statement that the majority of Americans felt as they did about the rule change.
"The overwhelming majority of Americans see the Biden administration’s rule change for what it is: a ridiculous, nonsensical and illegal election-year move that few can comprehend or support," Griffin said in the provided statement. "It’s outrageous. Congress enacted Title IX to protect and promote opportunities for women and girls in education and sports. For the last half-century, that’s what it has done. But President Biden and his Department of Education now want to radically reinterpret Title IX and recast it as a rule about gender identity."
Griffin said the rule they are challenging requires schools and universities to allow men onto women's and girls’ sports teams, which he says robs young female athletes of opportunities and forces schools and universities to allow men into women's and girls' locker rooms, restrooms and shower facilities.
Nebraska Attorney General Mike Hilgers also agreed with Griffin and Bailey.
"Title IX has a long history of protecting women from harassment and creating opportunities for female athletes," Hilgers said in a statement. "Unfortunately, the Biden Administration thinks it can take away privacy and opportunities from women. We are proud to stand with our sister states in filing this suit to stop the Administration's unlawful rewriting of Title IX, which will only serve to harm women and weaken the rule of law."
Title IX, enacted in 1972, has historically protected women and girls from sex-based discrimination in educational settings.
However, in April 2024, the Department of Education issued a new rule that reinterprets Title IX to include gender identity under the scope of sex discrimination, the lawsuit states.
The attorneys general claim the new interpretation of the rule mandates that educational institutions must recognize gender identity over biological sex in their programs and activities.
The rule change has sparked significant controversy and legal challenges.
The states in the lawsuit — Missouri, Arkansas, Iowa, Nebraska, North Dakota and South Dakota — argue that the new rule undermines the original purpose of Title IX.
The states assert that it will dismantle athletic opportunities for women, compromise privacy in facilities like restrooms and locker rooms, override state laws, and stifle free speech by punishing those who disagree with the Department’s interpretation of sex.
The plaintiffs believe this reinterpretation violates the federal Constitution and the Administrative Procedure Act, demanding the rule be nullified immediately.
One of the plaintiffs, a 15-year-old student named A.F. from Arkansas, provides a personal perspective on the rule's impact.
A.F. feels that allowing males who identify as females to use female-designated restrooms and locker rooms would breach her privacy and safety. She argues that her religious beliefs compel her to recognize individuals based on biological sex, and the new rule would force her to act against these beliefs, causing significant distress.
A.F. also participates in girls' sports and fears that competing against biologically male athletes would result in unfair disadvantages and potential physical harm, undermining the integrity of female sports.
The complaint traces the evolution of the federal government's stance on sex discrimination.
It follows the 2020 Supreme Court decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, which extended Title VII protections to sexual orientation and gender identity, when Biden issued an executive order applying this reasoning across federal laws, including Title IX.
This led to the Department of Education’s 2021 guidance, which was promptly challenged and enjoined by a federal court for not adhering to APA's rulemaking procedures.
The 2024 Final Rule redefines sex discrimination under Title IX to include gender identity and sexual orientation. It imposes strict requirements on educational institutions to accommodate gender identity claims without substantial evidence or inquiry, affecting access to sex-segregated spaces and participation in sports.
The new rule also lowers the threshold for what constitutes harassment, moving away from requiring both severity and pervasiveness to justify claims.
Critics argue that the rule disregards the original intent of Title IX, fails to consider the practical implications for female students, and imposes a burdensome, vague standard on educational institutions. They call for the rule’s immediate suspension, citing constitutional concerns and the potential for significant negative impacts on the beneficiaries Title IX was designed to protect.
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, St. Louis Division case number: 4:24-cv-00636