Loudoun County schools suspends boys in Title IX transgender locker room case
By: Mia Cathell
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Loudoun County Public Schools is reportedly suspending two of the three boys who were facing Title IX proceedings for privately expressing discomfort with a transgender student using the male locker room.
The complainant, a biological female who identifies as male, illicitly filmed the then-sophomore boys, some of whom were changing clothes, in violation of school rules on video recording and, possibly, of state privacy law. However, the boys were the ones accused of sexual harassment under Title IX, and LCPS officials used the video, which secretly captured the boys discussing among themselves being "so uncomfortable" with "a girl in here," as evidence against them.
According to Founding Freedoms Law Center attorney Josh Hetzler, who represented all three boys in the case, the school district's Title IX office has determined that two of the Stone Bridge High School boys committed sexual harassment and sex-based discrimination. In June, LCPS dropped the Title IX investigation into the third boy but added sexual discrimination allegations against the other two.
Hetzler told WJLA-TV that the two remaining boys were notified about their 10-day suspension on Friday evening. Pursuant to a no-contact order with the female student, the boys are forbidden from attending any of the same classes as her. The boys are also required to meet with school administrators to determine a corrective action plan.
WJLA-TV reported that one of the accused boys has already left Loudoun County with his family due to the district's "retaliatory" actions. Should he return to LCPS, his suspension will commence then, according to WJLA-TV.
The parents of the boys have repeatedly raised concerns about the Title IX violations appearing on their children's academic records. The boys will be high school juniors this school year, which is when students that age typically start applying for colleges.
After news of the case reached Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R-VA), at his request, Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares launched a state-level investigation into the school system's alleged mishandling of the locker room incident. Miyares ultimately found "troubling evidence" of possible Title IX abuses, unlawful retaliation, and suppression of free expression.
According to the Virginia attorney general's office, the boys, who are Christian and Muslim, raised religious objections to LCPS Policy 8040, which allows students to access school facilities, such as bathrooms and locker areas, corresponding to their "consistently asserted gender identity."
"Title IX was never meant to be used as a weapon against free speech or religious convictions," Miyares said in an announcement of the state's findings over the summer. "Every student in Virginia deserves the right to speak openly, think freely, and live according to their conscience without fear of retaliation. Protecting those rights is not political—it's foundational to who we are as Americans."
Miyares then referred the matter to the Department of Education's civil rights office and the Department of Justice's civil rights division for further federal investigation. Whether either or both of those agencies will act on the referrals is not yet clear.
The Washington Examiner contacted LCPS for comment regarding the disciplinary decision.
"To be absolutely clear: Loudoun County Public Schools (LCPS) would not investigate or discipline students based on their personal opinions, thoughts, or beliefs," the school district previously told the Washington Examiner, "provided those expressions do not violate policies prohibiting hate speech, discriminatory language, threats, or other forms of harmful or disruptive conduct."
LCPS is one of five Northern Virginia school districts refusing to scrap their respective transgender policies permitting students to use school facilities based on self-declared gender identity, not biological sex.
In July, the Department of Education determined that LCPS, Fairfax County Public Schools, Prince William County Public Schools, Alexandria City Public Schools, and Arlington Public Schools are violating Title IX.
The five school districts, in defiance of the Education Department's demands to protect sex-segregated spaces, are arguing that their transgender policies comply with a Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling in Grimm v. Gloucester County. The 2020 appellate case set legal precedent for allowing transgender students in federally funded schools to use the bathroom of their choosing.
The current conflict with the Trump administration centers on disagreement over interpretations of Title IX, which prohibits sex-based discrimination in federally funded educational programs.
On Friday, the Education Department began clawing back federal funding to the five school districts, which could cost each of them tens of millions of dollars in financial assistance annually.
"The Virginia divisions will have to defend their embrace of radical gender ideology over ensuring the safety of their students," an Education Department statement said.
Tags
Who is online
93 visitors
I must be caffeine deprived. I read this 3 times and it still makes no sense to me.
London county seems to be ground zero for elite, lawless insanity. They don’t care who they hurt in the name of their crazy ideaology.
They certainly don't seem to care about hurting their students.
There are certain parts of human anatomy God was not proud of so He doubled down and excused Himself by inventing shame ... what a swell Guy.
So you apparently approve of boys filming girls in locker rooms, restrooms, and so on? And it's OK to offend both Christian and Muslim boys?
First thing you need to do is ignore the culture war nonsense being propagated by religious conservatism be it Christian, Jewish or Muslim ... watch some South Park.
Does that make everything all better for you?
Whatever makes me laugh does ... thank you Lina Wertmuller!
Virginia law is a one-party consent state when it comes to secretly recording a conversation. What I'm not sure of is this trans student considered a member of the conversation. Usually the subject of a conversation is not considered a member or participant of the conversation.
Even if the law considers the subject of the conversation to be a member of the conversation, if nobody else in the conversation agreed to being recorded there may be issues when trying to get the recording admitted in court. That falls under the "it's up to the judge".
If there's nothing on the recording that shows the boys were directly talking to the trans student or were directly telling the trans student to leave the locker room, it's hard to see sexual harassment. But it would seem that the actions of the school are a direct violation of the First Amendment. Wonder how much of the taxpayers dollars will be spent here....
Recording in a locker room should be illegal and borders on child porn
Exactly, and yet... amazing the amount of concern for traffic striping but not actual people.
We had an owner of a very successful business in my town get popped for putting a recording device in his employee bathroom/changing room. He’s rooming with bubba now in the big house.