Litigation Chronology Transgender Students’ Access to Sex-Segregated Facilities

Johnston v. Univ. of Pittsburgh of the Commonwealth Sys. of Higher Educ.

  • United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania
  • Factual Background: transgender male student sought use of sex-segregated restrooms and locker rooms designated for men at the university
  • 3/31/15 District Court Decision: student’s claims against the university based upon Title IX and the Equal Protection Clause were dismissed
  • Current Status: case was terminated on 3/30/16 due to settlement reached while student’s appeal to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals was pending

G.G. v. Gloucester County Sch. Bd.

  • Factual Background: transgender male student seeks use of boy’s restroom at the school district
  • 9/17/15 District Court Decision: transgender student’s motion for preliminary injunction was denied, and his Title IX claim was dismissed (District Court has not yet addressed the student’s Equal Protection claim); transgender student appealed the denial of the preliminary injunction to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals (see below)
  • 4/19/16 Circuit Court Decision: the District Court’s denial of the transgender student’s motion for preliminary injunction (see above) was vacated, and the dismissal of the Title IX claim was reversed; the case was remanded back to the District Court which then granted the transgender student’s motion for preliminary injunction
  • Current Status: the School Board’s appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court was permitted on 10/29/16; the case was remanded back to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals on 3/6/17; on 8/2/17, the Circuit Court remanded the matter back to the District Court to address whether the case has become moot given that the transgender student has now since graduated

Texas v. United States

  • United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas
  • Factual Background: the State of Texas argued that the interpretation of Title IX by the U.S. Departments of Education (“DOE”) and Justice (“DOJ”) as provided in a 5/13/16 Dear Colleague Letter (which required student access to sex-segregated facilities based upon gender identity) was unlawful
  • 8/21/16 District Court Decision: Texas’ motion for a preliminary injunction was granted, and the DOE and DOJ were prohibited from enforcing the 5/13/16 Dear Colleague Letter nationwide
  • Current Status: the case was terminated by the parties on 3/30/17 after the Trump Administration withdrew the 5/13/16 DOE/DOJ Dear Colleague Letter on 2/22/17

Nebraska et al. v. United States et al.

  • Factual Background: the State of Nebraska and nine other states alleged that the DOE and DOJ violated the Administrative Procedure Act and other federal laws by issuing the 5/13/16 Dear Colleague Letter (see above) and controlling local school determinations regarding how best to designate locker room and bathroom assignments
  • Current Status: the case was terminated by the parties on 3/16/17 after the Trump Administration withdrew the 5/13/16 DOE/DOJ Dear Colleague Letter on 2/22/17

Carcańo v. McCrory

  • United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina
  • United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
    • 16-1989
  • Factual Background: two transgender students at UNC challenged North Carolina House Bill 2 (“Public Facilities Privacy and Security Act”) which required public agencies to ensure that sex-segregated facilities be used by persons based upon their “biological sex” which was defined as the sex listed on their birth certificate
  • 8/26/16 District Court Decision: the transgender students’ motion for a preliminary injunction was granted – the Court found that the transgender students had shown that they were likely to succeed on their Title IX claim but had not shown that they were likely to succeed on their Equal Protection claim
  • Current Status: an appeal to Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals was voluntarily dismissed by the parties on 4/20/17 after House Bill 2 was repealed by House Bill 142 on 3/30/17; on 7/21/17, the transgender students filed a consent motion requesting to file an Amended Complaint based upon the argument that House Bill 142 still discriminates against transgender individuals and perpetuates many of House Bill 2’s harms and stigmatization

Berger v. U.S. Department of Justice
North Carolinians for Privacy v. U.S. Department of Justice

  • Factual Background: regarding North Carolina House Bill 2 (see above), Plaintiffs sought declaratory judgments that the statute did not violate Title VII, Title IX or any other statutes
  • Current Status: both cases were voluntarily terminated by the parties on 4/14/17 after House Bill 2 was repealed by House Bill 142 on 3/30/17

 

Whitaker v. Kenosha Unified Sch. Dist. No. 1

  • Factual Background: transgender male student seeks use of the boy’s restroom at the school district
  • 9/22/16 District Court Decision: the transgender student’s motion for a preliminary injunction was granted – the Court found that the transgender student might succeed on his Title IX claim and had alleged sufficient facts to support his Equal Protection claim; the School District appealed the grant of the preliminary injunction to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals (see below)
  • 5/30/17 Seventh Circuit Decision: the Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court’s grant of preliminary injunctive relief in favor of the transgender student
  • Current Status: all discovery (fact and expert) must be completed by 11/3/17; scheduling conference to discuss final pretrial conference and trial dates scheduled for 11/6/17; and dispositive motions due on 12/18/17

Bd. of Educ. [of the Highland Local Sch. Dist.] v. U.S. Dep’t of Educ.

  • United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio
  • United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
    • 16-4117
  • Factual Background: transgender female student seeks use of girl’s restroom at the school district
  • 9/26/16 District Court Decision: the transgender student’s motion for a preliminary injunction was granted – the Court found that the transgender student is likely to succeed regarding both her Title IX claim and her Equal Protection claim
  • Current Status: the School District appealed the grant of the preliminary injunction to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals where a mediation conference is scheduled for 8/29/17; the student’s response brief is due on 9/12/17, and the District’s reply brief is due on 9/26/17; the District Court matter is now stayed pending a decision by the Court of Appeals

Students & Parents for Privacy v. United States Dep’t of Educ.

  • Factual Background: Students & Parents for Privacy filed a motion for a preliminary injunction requiring the school district to only permit the use of sex-segregated facilities, including locker rooms, on the basis of biological sex (not gender identity)
  • 10/18/16 Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge: the Magistrate Judge recommended that the District Court Judge deny the motion for a preliminary injunction because the Students & Parents for Privacy did not show a likelihood of success concerning alleged violations of the constitutional right to privacy or Title IX
  • Current Status: the Students & Parents for Privacy timely filed objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (see above) and supplemental briefing is currently taking place

Women’s Liberation Front v. U.S. Dept. of Justice

  • Factual Background: Plaintiff alleged that the 5/13/16 Dear Colleague Letter (see above) violated the Administrative Procedure Act, Title IX and the U.S. Constitution
  • Current Status: the case was terminated by the parties on 3/16/17 after the Trump Administration withdrew the 5/13/16 DOE/DOJ Dear Colleague Letter on 2/22/17

Evancho v. Pine-Richland Sch. Dist.

  • United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania
  • Factual Background: three transgender students sought the use of restrooms that correspond with their gender identity at the school district
  • 2/27/17 District Court Decision: the transgender students’ motion for a preliminary injunction was granted in part – the District Court found that the transgender students were likely to succeed regarding their Equal Protection claim but not their Title IX claim
  • Current Status: the parties have settled this matter, and a Joint Motion for Consent Judgment was filed on 8/1/17 and is currently pending

Doe v. Boyerstown Area Sch. Dist.

  • United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
  • Factual Background: various cisgender students allege violations of their constitutional right to privacy and Title IX based upon observing and/or being observed by a transgender male student while changing clothes in the male locker room
  • Current Status: the cisgender students filed a motion requesting preliminary injunctive relief on 5/17/17; the District’s responded to the motion on 6/9/17; an evidentiary hearing concerning the motion was held on 7/17/17 and 7/31/17; and oral argument concerning the motion is scheduled for 8/11/17; also, the School District Defendants filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ claims which is pending

A.H. v. Minersville Area Sch. Dist.

  • Factual Background: parents of an eight year-old transgender girl allege violations of Title IX and Equal Protection by requiring her to use the restroom which corresponds with the sex indicated on her birth certificate
  • Current Status: an Amended Complaint was filed on 5/30/17 to which the District filed a motion to dismiss which is pending; all fact discovery must be completed by 1/31/18; all expert discovery must be completed by 3/31/18; and all dispositive motions must be filed by 4/15/18

Adams v. The School Board of St. Johns County, Florida

  • United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida
  • Factual Background: a 16 year old transgender male student alleges violations of Title IX and Equal Protection by the District denying him access to the boy’s restrooms
  • Current Status: Complaint was filed on 6/28/17 and District filed a motion to dismiss on 8/1/17; transgender student’s motion for a preliminary injunction filed on 7/19/17; District’s response to motion due on 8/4/17; hearing regarding the motion scheduled for 8/10/17

Contact Roger Foley at rwf@mbm-law.net or 412.242.4400 of our Litigation Team with any questions your district is facing.