Key Takeaways:
- A federal judge has struck down Biden’s transgender bathroom guidance, calling it unconstitutional.
- The guidance aimed to force companies to let transgender men use women’s restrooms and enforce preferred pronouns.
- Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk ruled the guidance rewrote federal law without authority.
- The decision is seen as a cultural and legal victory for conservatives and supporters of women’s privacy.
In a significant legal blow to the Biden administration, a federal judge ruled against a controversial guidance that aimed to force businesses to adopt transgender bathroom policies and enforce the use of preferred pronouns. The ruling, handed down by Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, a Trump appointee, declared the guidance unconstitutional and struck it down. Here’s what you need to know.
The Ruling Explained
In 2024, the Biden administration’s Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued a guidance document that effectively rewrote federal civil rights law. The document warned employers with 15 or more employees that they could face investigations if they didn’t allow men identifying as transgender to use women’s restrooms or if they “misgendered” employees by not using their preferred pronouns.
The EEOC claimed the guidance didn’t have the force of law, but Judge Kacsmaryk disagreed. He ruled that the document went too far by attempting to rewrite Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which protects employees from discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, and national origin. Kacsmaryk argued that the Biden administration overstepped its authority by trying to redefine what constitutes sex discrimination without Congress’s approval.
Why This Matters
The ruling is being celebrated by conservatives and advocates for women’s rights as a major victory. Kevin Roberts, president of The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank that sued to block the guidance, called the decision a “cultural victory.” He said it sends a clear message: “You don’t have to surrender common sense at the altar of leftist ideology. You don’t have to pretend men are women.”
The Heritage Foundation, which employs around 300 people and falls under Title VII, partnered with Texas to challenge the guidance. They argued that the EEOC’s rules were unconstitutional and violated the Administrative Procedure Act. The judge agreed, stating that the Biden administration’s attempt to force businesses to adopt transgender policies was unlawful.
The Heritage Foundation’s Role
The Heritage Foundation played a key role in fighting the guidance. Dan Mauler, the group’s general counsel, called the ruling a “great day for the rule of law, common sense, and women and girls across the country.” He criticized the Biden administration for trying to weaponize civil rights law to push “leftist social engineering” by forcing companies to allow biological men into women-only spaces like restrooms and locker rooms.
Roberts encouraged conservatives to take a page from Heritage’s playbook, saying, “Heritage is doing exactly what the conservative movement needs to do: stop apologizing, start suing, and take back institutions.”
Understanding the Legal Background
The EEOC’s guidance relied heavily on the Supreme Court’s 2020 decision in Bostock v. Clayton County. In that case, the Court ruled that firing someone based on their sexual orientation or gender identity violated Title VII. However, Judge Kacsmaryk pointed out that the ruling didn’t go as far as the Biden administration claimed. Justice Neil Gorsuch, who wrote the majority opinion in Bostock, explicitly stated that the decision didn’t address issues like bathroom access or locker rooms.
The EEOC’s guidance tried to expand the definition of “sex” under Title VII to include “gender identity” and “sexual orientation,” but Kacsmaryk said this redefinition was unauthorized. “Congress knows how to amend Title VII to include needed accommodations,” he wrote, referencing how lawmakers added protections for pregnancy-related discrimination after a 1976 Supreme Court ruling.
What’s Next?
While the judge struck down the guidance, he stopped short of issuing a permanent injunction, which would have barred the EEOC from reimplementing similar rules in the future. This leaves the door open for the Biden administration to revisit the issue, though it would likely face significant legal challenges.
Texas, which joined the Heritage Foundation in the lawsuit, has been a vocal opponent of the Biden administration’s transgender policies. The state has repeatedly pushed back against federal overreach, and this ruling is the latest example of that effort.
For now, businesses are no longer under threat of EEOC investigations for maintaining sex-separated restrooms or refusing to use preferred pronouns. Supporters of the ruling say it’s a win for common sense and women’s privacy, while opponents argue it discriminates against transgender individuals. The debate is far from over, but for now, the courts have sided with those who believe the federal government overstepped its authority.