Litigation

The intersection of federal privacy law, parental rights, and student gender identity has become one of the most actively litigated areas of education law. For example, on January 28, 2026, the U.S. Department of Education’s Student Privacy Policy Office (SPPO) found that the California Department of Education (CDE) violated the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA)—a federal statute granting parents the right to access their children’s education records—by maintaining policies that pressure school officials to conceal students’ gender transitions from their parents.

Red treadmill at the stadium with the numbering

On June 30, 2026, the United States Supreme Court decided the consolidated cases West Virginia v. B.P.J. (No. 24-43) and Little v. Hecox (No. 24-38), upholding state laws in West Virginia and Idaho that prohibit transgender female athletes from participating in women’s and girls’ sports. In so doing, the High Court reversed decisions from both the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (West Virginia) and the Ninth Circuit (Idaho). The ruling addressed two distinct legal questions—one under Title IX and the other under the Equal Protection Clause—with different vote counts on each.

Person using smartphone beside laptop with chat icon overlay, representing online messaging, mobile communication, customer support, social media interaction, app notification, and digital connection.

AI tools have become part of the daily workflow for school administrators, board members, and staff, whether they are used to draft emails, organize information, or research questions that might otherwise go to a lawyer. However, a fast-moving line of court decisions is drawing a hard line: what you type into a public AI platform may not stay private. In the education context, where legal exposure touches everything from employment decisions to student discipline and everything in between, that risk matters more than most schools realize.

For more than three decades, the federal government maintained a policy restricting immigration enforcement operations at or near schools and other “sensitive locations.” That longstanding protection ended abruptly in January 2025, when the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) rescinded its sensitive locations policy and replaced it with guidance leaving enforcement decisions to the discretion of individual Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The policy shift has led to increased immigration enforcement activity at or near schools nationwide, prompting legal challenges from school districts concerned about disruptions to their educational mission.

Judge gavel on a wooden desk, law books background

In recent years, a handful of high-profile legal challenges have emerged in response to state laws requiring the display of religious texts in public school classrooms, particularly in conservative states. Both Texas and Louisiana have enacted legislation mandating that public schools prominently display the Ten Commandments, prompting lawsuits from parents and advocacy groups who argue that such measures violate the First Amendment. While courts have expressed skepticism toward state-sponsored religious displays in schools, ongoing litigation means the future of these laws—and the separation of church and state in public education—remains uncertain.

image of a half-open door to school class

Numerous school districts across the United States still operate under desegregation orders originally implemented in the decades following the Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. Board of Education, which held that racially segregated school districts were unconstitutional. 347 U.S. 483 (1954). Achieving unitary status marks the point at which a formerly racially segregated school system is deemed to have dismantled de jure segregation and, therefore, may be released from federal court supervision.

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) has ceased investigating claims based solely on alleged disparate impact discrimination. Traditionally, disparate impact discrimination claims could be proven when a seemingly neutral employment policy or practice disproportionately affected members of a protected class—such as race, gender, or age—even if there was no evidence of an intent to discriminate.

Columns_000017257808

The legal landscape for transgender rights in the United States continues to evolve rapidly, with the U.S. Supreme Court (the “Court”) and federal courts issuing pivotal decisions. The past year has seen high-profile cases on access to gender-affirming care, participation in school sports, restroom policies, and the intersection of First Amendment rights with issues of gender identity. These cases have resulted in a patchwork of rulings and left many legal questions unresolved, with significant implications for students, educators, and families nationwide.

Columns_000017257808

The legal saga surrounding the 2024 Title IX Regulations reached a new peak earlier this month. On January 9, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky granted summary judgment in favor of the plaintiffs in Tennessee v. Cardona, one of the cases challenging the 2024 Title IX Regulations. In doing so, the court vacated the 2024 Title IX regulations nationwide.

Legal office of lawyers, justice and law concept : Judge's gavel or hammer and base used by a judge person on a desk in a courtroom with blurred books and a bookshelf or bookcase in the background.

It has been two months since the August 1, 2024, implementation date for the 2024 Title IX regulations promulgated by the U.S. Department of Education (“Department”), and schools across the country still face uncertainty from the court cases challenging the regulations.

Since their publication, the new regulations have faced strong opposition by states and national…