(MENAFN- Live Mint) A divided US Supreme Court has declined to strengthen the Biden administration 's efforts to expand anti-discrimination protections for transgender students in schools nationwide.
The justices allowed two lower court rulings to remain in place, temporarily blocking implementing a new Education Department rule in 10 states. The rule, effective on August 1 in some regions, is at the centre of a complex legal battle.
Four justices - liberals Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Ketanji Brown Jackson, and conservative Neil Gorsuch - partly dissented, advocating for the rule's enforcement in the 10 states, Bloomberg reported.
Also Read | Same-sex acts in Iraq: Members of LGBTI could be jailed for upto 15 years under
The controversy primarily revolves around provisions allowing students to use facilities aligned with their gender identities, along with a second chance that states say would open teachers to punishment for not using students' preferred pronouns.
However, the Biden administration did not seek Supreme Court approval for these contested measures. Instead, Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar requested that other less controversial parts of the rule be reinstated while the legal battles continue.
Prelogar argued that federal trial judges in Kentucky and Louisiana issued overly broad orders that blocked the entire rule. The provisions the administration sought to restore include recognising gender identit under existing anti-discrimination laws and enhancing protections for pregnant and postpartum students.
Also Read | A crisis of inclusivity: Spare a thought for transgender students
The states challenging the rule claim its provisions are interconnected and would lead to significant compliance costs and confusion as the school year begins. Louisiana and three other states argued that implementing even parts of the rule would require considerable time and resources, as per Bloomberg inputs.
The lawsuits involve Tennessee, Kentucky, Indiana, Ohio, Virginia, West Virginia, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, and Idaho. So far, around 20 states have filed cases against the rule, with other challenges still pending in lower courts. The rule remains fully in effect in parts of the country without these rulings.
(With Bloomberg inputs)
MENAFN17082024007365015876ID1108569963
Legal Disclaimer:
MENAFN provides the information “as is” without warranty of any kind. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the provider above.