July 10, 2024

Rep. Takano Fights to Keep Title IX Protections for LGBTQ+ Students

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today, Congressman Mark Takano (CA-39) spoke in opposition to H.J.Res.165, a piece of legislation that seeks to upend recent Biden Administration updates to Title IX.

Rep. Takano released a statement in April when the Department of Education released a finalized rule to Title IX to include explicit protections for LGBTQ+ students in schools receiving federal funds. 



Remarks As Prepared for Delivery:

I rise in strong opposition to the resolution.

The Biden Administration’s rule strengthens and clarifies protections against sex-based harassment and discrimination for LGBTQI+, pregnant and parenting students. Consistent with the Bostock decision, the final rule clarifies that Title IX’s protections extend to cover discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, sex characteristics, and sex stereotypes.

This is gravely needed for LGBTQI+ students. Currently, 83% of LGBTQI+ students face victimization at school. In states with laws that specifically target gay and transgender youth, the rate of hate crimes in schools has quadrupled.

For these students, the explicit protections the Biden Administration has finalized will make a life-changing difference. This rule will decrease absenteeism, improve mental health, and allow students recourse when they are the targets of harassment and violence.

Republicans, however, are seeking to overturn a rule precisely because of the protections it extends to queer students—and with the passage of this resolution, tear down ALL of the protections that this essential rule clarifies.

This resolution will have drastic consequences: the protections that the Administration offers for pregnant and parenting students would also be overturned. Survivors of sexual harassment and assault will continue to face significant barriers to completing their education.

While Republicans claim that this resolution is in the interest of women’s rights, their proposed solution will make the situation worse for female students.

What overturning this rule does is exacerbate existing inequalities, prevent any future administration from enacting a similar rule, then place the blame solely on the LGBTQI+ community. It is shortsighted, petty, and cruel.

I will vote against overturning this rule and I urge my colleagues to do the same.

I yield back.