Discussing restrooms and locker rooms, the government's guidance said schools "must allow transgender students access to such facilities consistent with their gender identity".
The Supreme Court yesterday announced it will review a decision from the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals that found that federal anti-discrimination law protects the right of teenage boy who is transgender, to use the men's restrooms at his Virginia high school.
Grimm, who was born female and identifies as male, is suing the school district for the right to use the boys' restroom after the School Board enacted a policy a year ago limiting bathroom use to the one corresponding with a person's biological sex rather than the gender with which one identifies.
"I continue to suffer daily because of the school board's decision to make my bathroom use a matter of public debate", Grimm said in an op-ed in the Washington Post.
The Supreme Court earlier had stayed the appeals court ruling, preventing Grimm from using the school's boys' room, pending the litigation's outcome.
A date for oral arguments at the Supreme Court hasn't been scheduled yet. It said that allowing Grimm to use the boys restroom raises privacy concerns and may cause some parents to pull their children out of school. But by the USA justices agreeing to take up Gloucester County's petition, they could ultimately decide a question that has divided many school districts across the nation. The school district asked the Supreme Court to consider the entire concept of the Auer deference precedent, but the court said it will not do so.
The court could use the case to resolve similar disputes across the country, said Shannon Minter, legal director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights.
The Supreme Court justices will decide if the lower court was correct to defer to the Department of Education's interpretation of Title IX to include discrimination based on gender identity. Since then, Grimm has been using a separate restroom as the ACLU sued the school board in 2015 on Grimm's behalf.
Incredibly, the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals said it was required to defer to the administration's backward and weird rewriting of the law and effectively handed its gavel to the Department of Education.
"I think that there's a lot of support for transgender people and them using the right bathrooms, but that doesn't get laws passed", Gavin says.
"The Supreme Court's ultimate decision in this case will have a profound impact on transgender youth across the country", Warbelow said. A number of states, led by Texas, challenged the order in federal court - a federal district judge in Texas sided with them and blocked the order.
With or without deference to the agency, should the Department's specific interpretation of Title IX [Ed backgrounder] and 34 CFR § 106.33 [text] be given effect?