<!–

–>

June 17, 2023

The Biden regime has devised a deceitful scheme to shut down citizen efforts to remove schoolbooks containing LGBT themes, obscenity, or explicit sexuality. How do they plan to accomplish this?

‘); googletag.cmd.push(function () { googletag.display(‘div-gpt-ad-1609268089992-0’); }); document.write(”); googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.pubads().addEventListener(‘slotRenderEnded’, function(event) { if (event.slot.getSlotElementId() == “div-hre-Americanthinker—New-3028”) { googletag.display(“div-hre-Americanthinker—New-3028”); } }); }); }

The Department of Education’s (DoE) Office of Civil Rights is now monitoring book challenges across the country for “discriminatory” actions, specifically related to books with any “LGBTQI+” content.

But here’s the problem with their plan: There is no federal law banning discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender identity, transgender identity, queer identity, intersex identity, or plus identity. So, there is no solid basis for the DoE’s intervention in what should, in any case, be a local issue.

Recall that the Democrats were never able to pass their federal “Equality Act” which would have protected “sexual orientation,” “gender identity,” and “LGBTQ” identities (all left undefined) from discrimination. So, illegitimate decrees via executive order, bureaucratic memos, and agency regulations are used to stand in for law under the Democrat regime. Will they get away this legal sleight-of-hand?

‘); googletag.cmd.push(function () { googletag.display(‘div-gpt-ad-1609270365559-0’); }); document.write(”); googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.pubads().addEventListener(‘slotRenderEnded’, function(event) { if (event.slot.getSlotElementId() == “div-hre-Americanthinker—New-3035”) { googletag.display(“div-hre-Americanthinker—New-3035”); } }); }); }

Existing discrimination law clearly DoEs not “protect LGBTQI+ rights.” So the Democrats somehow needed to reinterpret these:

  • Civil Rights Act of 1964 which includes
      – Title VI re: federal funding
      – Title VII re: employment
  • Title IX (1972) re: sex discrimination in education

Controversial Supreme Court rulings helped move “rights” thinking leftward: Lawrence v. Texas (2013) okayed sodomy. Obergefell (2015) blessed “same-sex marriage.” Bostock (2020) inserted undefined terms “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” into employment law (Title VII). The final radical push was the “Respect for Marriage Act” (December 2022) which enshrined same-sex “marriage” in federal law.

But those were still not enough to justify intervention in schools. Something more was needed.

At the time of the Bostock ruling, commentators predicted that its new expanded definition of “sex” in employment law would be applied in any case dealing with discrimination on the basis of “sex” (not just related to employment). And that’s exactly what happened.

In January 2021, Biden issued a far-reaching executive order. Anywhere existing statutes or regulations prohibit “sex discrimination,” the E.O. instructed all federal agencies to revise those to include “gender identity and sexual orientation.”

Implementing this order in March 2021 the Department of Justice (DoJ) Civil Rights Division posted a memo declaring that Bostock’s redefinition of “sex” applies not just to Title VII (employment), but also to Title IX (education). So by fiat, the clear meaning of “sex” in Title IX (re: education equity) was changed to include prohibiting discrimination based on “gender identity and sexual orientation.”