Feds to appeal transgender policy injunction
5th Circuit intervention sought in fight over student bathroom use
The Obama administration plans to appeal an injunction by a North Texas federal judge that halted the implementation of new guidelines on transgender student bathroom use.
The government said it would appeal after U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor on Wednesday issued an order clarifying that his ruling applies nationwide.
Then, on Thursday, lawyers representing the U.S. Department of Justice and other federal agencies filed a notice indicating their intent to ask the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to intervene before a lawsuit about the guidelines is decided by the district court.
The defendants have questioned the injunction on several grounds, including whether the ban applies to employees — such as transgender teachers and staff.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said the appeal notice “merely showcases the impatience and overzealousness that led the Obama administration to bypass Congress and attempt to foist an illegal policy onto the states,” according to a statement released by his office. ”We are confident that the rule of law will prevail.”
In May, the U.S. Department of Justice and the U.S. Department of Education issued a letter stating that the federal agencies “treat a student’s gender identity as the student’s sex for purposes of Title IX and its implementing regulations.” Title IX prohibits sex discrimination in educational programs and activities.
The same month, officials and agencies representing 11 states including Texas and led by Paxton sued the Obama administration about the guidelines. The plaintiffs now include representatives from 13 states.
O’Connor granted a preliminary injunction in August. He presides over the Wichita Falls division in the Northern District of Texas.
Wednesday’s order was a partial response to the defendants’ request for the judge to clarify his ban on several issues, including whether it applied beyond the jurisdictions that have sued.
“A nationwide injunction is necessary because the alleged violation extends nationwide. Defendants are a group of agencies and administrators capable of enforcing their guidelines nationwide, affecting numerous state and school district facilities across the country,” O’Connor’s order said. “Should the court only limit the injunction to the plaintiff states who are a party to this cause of action, the court risks a ‘substantial likelihood that a geographically-limited injunction would be ineffective.’ ”
This week, Paxton also heralded the judge’s assertion that the injunction had force across the entire country.
“I am proud to lead a coalition of 13 states against the Obama administration’s latest illegal federal overreach,” the attorney general’s statement said. “The court’s reaffirmation of a nationwide injunction should send a clear message to the president that Texas won’t sit idly by as he continues to ignore the Constitution.”