Supreme Court denies bid to halt Biden’s trans dorm policy

07/01/2023

37 2 minutes read

The U.S. Supreme Court declined to review a case by a private Christian college in Missouri seeking to stop a Biden administration policy that it believes would mandate the acceptance of biological males in female dormitories.

In an orders list Tuesday, the nation’s high court denied the appeal in School of the Ozarks, Inc. v. Biden. Located near Branson, the College of the Ozarks filed a case against the U.S. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development in April 2021 over a policy that forbids housing discrimination based on gender identity.

The policy follows an executive order issued by President Joe Biden in 2021, broadening the scope of the Fair Housing Act’s anti-discrimination provisions to include sexual orientation and gender identity.

The Alliance Defending Freedom, a legal nonprofit working for religious freedom which represented the college, argued that the policy would compel the institution to permit biological males access to female dormitories and shared shower spaces, or risk incurring financial penalties potentially exceeding six figures, along with punitive damages and legal fees.

“The U.S. Supreme Court left this issue unresolved,” ADF Senior Counsel Julie Marie Blake said in a statement to The Heartlander. “Alliance Defending Freedom will continue to confront government overreach. … It is wrong to force schools to open girls’ dorms, bedrooms, and shared showers to males, and ADF will do everything in its power to ensure that religious colleges remain free to protect the young women who attend their institutions.”

ADF and the college argue that the HUD directive contradicts the traditional interpretation of the Fair Housing Act, which recognizes sex as biological in nature. Their stance, backed by 19 states, multiple Christian colleges and numerous advocacy groups, also claims the case represents an expansion of federal power, arguing that the government has failed to balance anti-discrimination policy with religious beliefs.

Despite the lack of Supreme Court review, the college has indicated it may not comply with the Biden administration’s mandate, hinting at possible future conflicts over the issue.

ADF Senior Counsel and Vice President of Appellate Advocacy John Bursch underlined this defiance, arguing that the government cannot suppress a faith-based institution’s constitutionally protected freedoms due to disagreements over views on marriage and sexuality.

In May 2021, U.S. District Judge Roseann Ketchmark of the Western District of Missouri, appointed by former President Barack Obama, initially ruled against the college. Subsequently, in July 2022, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit upheld Judge Ketchmark’s ruling in a 2-1 decision. They contended that the college lacked standing, as the HUD policy did not directly impact the institution.

Circuit Judge Leonard Grasz, who former President Donald Trump appointed, expressed his disagreement, asserting that the directive contradicted the appropriate procedure of federal guidance, which includes a provision for public feedback.

“An agency’s issuance of a guidance document that fails to adhere to the proper administrative procedures may achieve compliance with the government’s desired policy outcomes by in terrorem means, but it skirts the rule of law and undermines our values,” wrote Grasz. “This is especially true where regulated entities are placed under a sword of Damocles but are denied access to the courts because the sword has not yet fallen.”

Last September, the college filed a request for a full court hearing before the 8th Circuit, however, the appeals court denied the rehearing request on Sept. 30, 2021.