EDITORIAL: Courts rebuke Biden’s Title IX rewrite

This month, U.S. District Court Judge John Broomes of Kansas ruled against the Department of Education’s rewrite of Title IX. This isn’t the first time the Biden administration has lost in court on this issue. Judges in Kentucky and Louisiana have also blocked the rewrite from taking effect in more than a dozen states.

Passed in 1972, Title IX outlawed discrimination on the basis of sex in education. Among other things, it led to the creation of new athletic opportunities for girls and women. In April, the Biden administration issued a new rule. It reinterpreted sex to mean gender identity and sexual orientation. That would force schools to treat biological males who identify as transgender as females. The rule would apply to K-12 schools and higher education institutions.

The rule is intended to be far-reaching. It would apply to bathrooms, locker rooms, and even hotel rooms on overnight school trips. It probably would apply to sports teams as well, although the Biden administration tried to leave itself some wiggle room on this issue. That’s a nod to political reality. Allowing biological men to compete in women’s sporting events doesn’t poll well. The biological differences between men and women are readily apparent, even if that doesn’t fit the progressive narrative.

“The court finds that the unambiguous plain language of the statutory provisions and the legislative history make clear that the term ‘sex’ means the traditional concept of biological sex in which there are only two sexes, male and female,” Judge Broomes wrote in his decision. Further, “Defendants do not dispute that at the time Title IX was enacted in 1972, the term ‘sex’ was understood to mean the biological distinctions between males and females and conceded as such during the hearing.”

The Biden administration deserved to lose because Congress is supposed to make law. The president enforces the laws that Congress passes. He doesn’t get to rewrite them by unilaterally and arbitrarily redefining words to promote his own political objectives.

This isn’t a new concept. In 1975, Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare Secretary Caspar Weinberger oversaw the creation of regulations for Title IX. Following passage of the law, a debate ensued over whether it applied to athletics. Mr. Weinberger noted that Congress had rejected an amendment that would have exempted collegiate athletics from Title IX. He determined that “athletics are covered.”

If Democrats seek to advance an updated version of Title IX, they’re free to introduce a bill in Congress and to persuade a majority of lawmakers in the House and Senate to get on board. In the meantime, Judge Broomes and other jurists are on firm legal ground in rejecting the White House’s efforts to act as a de facto legislature.