When the Cardington-Lincoln Board of Education met on Aug. 8, Superintendent Brian Petrie gave the board’s response to the Department of Education’s order on transgender students.

“As many of you are aware, the U S Supreme Court, by a 5-3 vote, issued a stay regarding a case in Virginia where the court had ordered a school to allow for a transgender student to use the restroom of the gender with which they identified. The court, with its stay, allows the school to keep the status quo of the rules it was currently using. Those rules dictated the students use the restroom of their biological sex.”

He noted the cases going on around the country including Highland in Morrow County.

Then he issued the following statement: “The U S. Department of Justice and the U S Department of Education issued what they are calling significantguidance in regards to the issue of the rights of transgender students in public schools. The board and administration have taken great care in not only reviewing the federal guidelines but also in consulting with legal counsel to insure that our policies and practices align with the best interests of all students in our care.

As with most controversial and complex issues there are ongoing legal disputes with two or more distinct views. It is clear courts will not create a final resolution in a short amount of time. The board believes the precedent has been set in the interpretation of Title Nine – protecting privacy by maintaining separate rest rooms and locker rooms on the basis of sex is not considered to be unconstitutional – therefore, the board does not believe there is a need to further define or modify the definition of sex when referring to Title Nine Protection and will continue to protect the privacy, safety and dignity of all students.”

He commented “We’re encouraged by the ruling of the Supreme Court in that they have some respect for the policies and procedures that have already been put in place by schools in following Title Nine and that’s what we willcontinue to do.”

“If the court decides to not hear the case, the ruling of the lower court will go back in place.”

By Evelyn Long

The Sentinel

Reach us at [email protected]