West Virginia Family Challenges Single-Sex Middle School Program Rooted in Stereotypes
ACLU Files Lawsuit on Behalf of Family that Has Been Adversely Affected by Faulty Program
PARKERSBURG, W.Va. – The American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of West Virginia today sued a middle school they contend harms the education of students by illegally forcing them into same-sex classes and using discredited sex-based teaching methods.
The lawsuit, filed on behalf of a mother and her daughters, contends Van Devender Middle School implemented a curriculum that relies on faulty science and outmoded stereotypes. For example, the boys’ classrooms are more brightly lit and teachers permit boys to move about during class to exert energy, on the theory that boys see better in bright light. In contrast, girls are to sit quietly and share feelings in dimly lit rooms.
“Supporters of these programs make completely unfounded generalizations about boys and girls, but offer no proof that these strategies pay off academically,” said Sarah Rogers, staff attorney with the ACLU of West Virginia. “What has been proven, however, is that these programs foster stereotypes and hurt kids who don’t fit the idea of how a stereotypical boy or girl is supposed to learn and behave.”
Teaching based on stereotypes places any student who does not fall into artificially created norms at risk. For example, a girl represented in the lawsuit is frequently reprimanded in class for her inability to sit still, despite the fact that she has attention deficit disorder. As punishment she is frequently sent to the boys’ room where she is not permitted to take part in physical or academic activities with the boys, but instead is told to sit and face a wall.
“My children are suffering academically and made to feel as though they’re abnormal because they don’t fit these completely untrue stereotypes,” said the mother, who has remained anonymous to protect her daughters’ privacy. “All kids learn differently, no matter what sex they are, and my daughters and their classmates deserve better.”
One of her daughters is legally blind and has repeatedly requested that the lights in her classroom be made brighter like they are in the boys’ classroom. In response, she was told to sit by a window, which was inadequate and further interfered with her ability to participate in class. She consequently required a stronger prescription for her glasses and contacts. Another daughter was not permitted time to take notes during PowerPoint presentations because her teacher told her that girls are supposed to learn better through auditory, not visual, input. Her grades have gone down as a result.
“It can be tempting to resort to dramatic changes when it comes to fixing public schools. But coeducation is not the problem, and separating kids to teach to sex stereotypes is certainly not the answer,” said Amy L, Katz, cooperating attorney with the ACLU Women’s Rights Project. “What’s happening in this school is happening across the country in other misguided programs, and children are suffering for it.”
Federal law allows coeducational schools to implement single-sex programs only if they can offer a compelling reason for the decision. Programs may not be based on generalizations about the talents and capacities of each sex. They must be completely voluntary, and a substantially equal co-ed alternative must be available, which Van Devender does not offer. That means any family that wishes to opt out would have to change schools.
Many single-sex programs, including the one at Van Devender, are based on discredited theories of the supposed differences between boys’ and girls’ brains, including ones that claimed girls do badly under stress, so they should not be given time limits on tests; and that boys who like to read, do not enjoy contact sports and do not have many close male friends should be firmly disciplined, required to spend time with “normal males” and made to play sports.
The clients in this case reached out to the ACLU when they became aware of the nature of the sex separation at Van Devender as the result of ACLU’s “Teach Kids, Not Stereotypes” campaign questioning stereotyped single-sex programs nationwide.
Counsel on the case include Lenora Lapidus, Galen Sherwin, Christina Brandt-Young and Amy L. Katz of the ACLU Women’s Rights Project; Sarah Rogers of the ACLU of West Virginia; Joshua Hartman, Roxann Henry and Marissa Harris of Morrison Foerster LLP; and Roger Forman.
For more information on “Teach Kids, Not Stereotypes” please visit: www.aclu.org/womens-rights/teach-kids-not-stereotypes
Women's Rights
Doe v. Wood County Board of Education
Women's Rights
Doe v. Wood County Board of Education
Learn More About the Issues in This Press Release
-
Press ReleaseOct 2024
LGBTQ Rights
+2 Issues
At Supreme Court, Tennessee Seeks to Expand Reach of Dobbs to Ban Health Care for Transgender YouthAt Supreme Court, Tennessee Seeks to Expand Reach of Dobbs to Ban Health Care for Transgender Youth
WASHINGTON – In their brief defending the state’s ban on gender-affirming medical care for transgender youth, Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti has asked the Supreme Court to expand its ruling overturning Roe v. Wade and allow the state to target transgender people’s autonomy over their own bodies, too. In U.S. v. Skrmetti, three Tennessee transgender youth and their families are challenging a state law that prohibits medical providers from prescribing medical treatments to transgender youth, such as puberty blockers and hormone replacement therapies, that are allowed for minors who are not transgender. Represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Tennessee, Lambda Legal, and Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP, the families argue that the ban violates their Equal Protection rights under the 14th Amendment. In the brief filed today, Tennessee relies on the Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Whole Women’s Health in an attempt to justify its ban on gender-affirming health care for transgender people. The brief cites to Dobbs at least 10 times in sweeping arguments to justify government sex discrimination. “We’ve seen just how far extreme politicians will push to deny us our reproductive freedom, from banning abortion to threatening IVF to even threatening to put doctors in jail for providing emergency care, with deadly consequences for women’s lives,” said Jennifer Dalven, director of the ACLU’s Reproductive Freedom Project. “The same politicians who are trying to control women have now set their sights on transgender people and their families and are trying to control their bodies and lives. Allowing politicians to continue down this road could hold severe implications for the freedom of all people to decide what is right for their own body.” Tennessee claims that their ban on gender-affirming care does not discriminate on the basis of sex even though it bans minors of one sex from accessing health care it allows to members of another sex. A transgender girl is barred from taking doctor-prescribed estrogen because Tennessee considers it “inconsistent” with her birth-assigned sex of male but a cisgender girl with a birth-assigned sex of female is permitted to take estrogen for any purpose including to affirm her female gender identity. “Since this Project’s founding by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, we have adamantly challenged efforts to limit who we can be based on our gender or ability to bear children,” said Ria Tabacco Mar, director of the ACLU’s Women’s Rights Project. “Tennessee’s attempt to limit who young people can become based on their sex shares a through-line with our nation’s history of subjugating women in the name of biology. The fight for each of us to live fully and authentically must include trans people. There is no ‘transgender’ exception to the U.S. Constitution.” In April 2023, the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Tennessee, Lambda Legal, and Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP sued the state of Tennessee to block S.B. 1, which prohibits medical providers from prescribing medical treatments to transgender youth, such as puberty blockers and hormone replacement therapies, that it exempts for minors who are not transgender. Following a decision by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, S.B. 1 took effect in July 2023. Since 2021, 24 states have banned hormone therapies for transgender youth. “Laws like Tennessee’s are not benign regulations of medical care; they are discriminatory efforts to exclude transgender people from the protections of the Constitution,” said Chase Strangio, co-director of the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Project. “These bans represent a dangerous and discriminatory affront to the well-being of transgender youth across the country and their constitutional right to equal protection under the law.” -
Press ReleaseSep 2024
Women's Rights
Civil Rights Groups Tell Federal Appeals Court that Protections for Pregnant Workers Cover Abortion CareCivil Rights Groups Tell Federal Appeals Court that Protections for Pregnant Workers Cover Abortion Care
WASHINGTON, D.C. - On Friday, a broad coalition of labor, workers’ rights, and gender justice organizations — led by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the ACLU of Arkansas, and the National Women’s Law Center (NWLC) — filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit in support of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC) regulations implementing the landmark Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA), including the regulations’ explicit protection for workers who have abortions. The PWFA, which took effect last year, was the culmination of a decade-long campaign to secure access to reasonable accommodations for workers with temporary limitations caused by “pregnancy, childbirth, and related medical conditions.” The EEOC’s regulations provide comprehensive guidance to workers, employers, and the courts about the statute’s range of protections, including job-protected time off for medical treatment and recovery. The amicus brief filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit supports the EEOC in a challenge by 17 red states that are trying to block the PWFA regulations’ coverage of accommodations for abortion-related care. In June, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas dismissed the states’ challenge, and the states appealed to the Eighth Circuit. Their appeal includes a request that the Eighth Circuit issue a preliminary injunction of the regulations’ abortion provisions. The ACLU-NWLC brief details the federal law’s longstanding ban on discrimination against workers who obtain abortions – protection the PWFA intended to continue. The brief also documents the accounts of workers whose health and jobs were put at risk when their employers denied them accommodations, including time off, for abortion care. Such accounts illustrate the urgent need for clarity with respect to the PWFA’s coverage of abortion-related accommodations, and the devastating medical and financial consequences if such accommodations are denied. “Abortion has long been recognized as part of the full spectrum of workers’ pregnancy-related needs that are protected by the law, ” said Gillian Thomas, senior staff attorney at the ACLU’s Women's Rights Project. “The states’ challenge has created uncertainty, and seeks to deprive workers of essential, job-protected time off for abortion care, posing significant health risks and leading to forced pregnancies. The EEOC regulations are vital to ensure pregnant workers don't have to choose between their health and their jobs.” “Extremist politicians are demonstrating repeatedly their willingness to risk women’s health to advance their anti-abortion agenda,” said Gaylynn Burroughs, vice president for Education and Workplace Justice at the National Women’s Law Center (NWLC). “Let’s be clear: abortion care is pregnancy-related care, and stripping essential protections for abortion from the PWFA would endanger the health and economic security of pregnant workers.” “The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act and its regulations provide a lifeline for workers who need accommodations during the most critical periods of their lives. Attempting to strip away these protections, particularly for abortion-related needs, is an affront to the rights and well-being of pregnant workers,” said John Williams, legal director of the ACLU of Arkansas. “All people in all aspects of pregnancy, including abortion, should be treated with the care and consideration they deserve. We stand firmly with the EEOC in defending these essential protections.” A copy of the brief can be found here. -
PodcastSep 2024
Women's Rights
How Sue Bird Is Supercharging Women's SportsHow Sue Bird Is Supercharging Women's Sports
-
Press ReleaseJul 2024
Women's Rights
LGBTQ Rights
ACLU Condemns House Measure Against Department of Education Title IX RuleACLU Condemns House Measure Against Department of Education Title IX Rule
WASHINGTON – Today, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to pass H.J. Res. 165, a Congressional Review Act resolution disapproving of the U.S. Department of Education’s final Title IX rule providing guidance to schools on protecting students from sexual harassment, pregnancy discrimination, anti-LGBTQ discrimination, and other forms of sex discrimination. Mike Zamore, ACLU National Policy and Government Affairs Director, had the following response: “Today’s vote to completely repeal the Title IX rule takes a sledgehammer to the government’s ability to ensure that all students have the opportunity to learn free from sex discrimination and harassment. Stripping critical civil rights protections from LGBTQ students and students who are pregnant and parenting - as this resolution would do - is something that all members of Congress should strongly oppose. This is also not how Congress should act to protect the rights of students who face disciplinary action under Title IX because passing this resolution would prevent future rulemaking to ensure fair processes in school disciplinary proceedings.” The ACLU’s letter urging a “No” vote on H.J. Res. 165 can be found here: /documents/aclu-urges-no-vote-on-h-j-res-165 The ACLU’s statement on the final Title IX rule can be found here: /press-releases/155090